Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 1 of 57

FILED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ., ,1 .
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA =5 ?8
NORTHERN DIVISION

Cl ERK
US DISTRICI COURT

iLUNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. 

G. FORD GILBERT, 
afk/a ?Gregory Gilbert,? 18 U.S.C. 666;
MARTIN J. CONNORS, and 18 U.S.C. 1952;
RANDALL M. DAVIS 18 U.S.C. 1001;
18 U.S.C. 2]

SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
The Grand Jury charges:
I. INTRODUCTION
At all times relevant to this Superseding Indictment:
A. Trina Health

1. Trina Health, LLC (Trina Health) was a Nevada limited liability corporation.
Previously, Trina Health was registered as a California corporation. Trina Health was
headquartered in McClellan Park, California. Trina Health operated, through license
agreements, outpatient diabetes treatment clinics. Each clinic employed one or more health care
providers to oversee the diabetes treatment being provided at those clinics.

2. Defendant G. Ford Gilbert, a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,? a California resident, was the
founder, president, and chief executive of?cer (CEO) of Trina Health. In or about 1975, Gilbert
obtained a juris doctor degree and became a practicing attorney in California. Subsequently,
Gilbert attended medical school, but did not graduate. He later obtained a doctor of philosophy

degree from an online educational institution. Gilbert claimed that he developed the pump-based

treatment provided at Trina Health clinics.

 

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 2 of 57

3. At its clinics, health care providers af?liated with Trina Health or a Trina Health
licensee provided ?Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment.? This treatment was a form of outpatient
intravenous insulin infusion therapy (OIVIT). Chronic intermittent intravenous insulin therapy
was another term for OIVIT. The treatment required a patient to spend three hours in a chair at a
Trina Health clinic. During those three hours, the patient received, through intravenous
injection, a series of infusions of insulin. Trina Health recommended that a patient undergo
Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment sessions once per week in order for the patient to see bene?cial
health outcomes. In promotional materials, Trina Health stated that the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment could be used to treat more than diabetes. Among the other conditions that Trina
Health claimed that the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment could treat were: neuropathy,
hypoglycemia, hypertension, chronic fatigue, wounds, and erectile dysfunction.

4. Trina Health operated as a ?pyramid scheme.? That is, Trina Health generated
revenue by recruiting individuals into its business based on the promise that those individuals
would make money by recruiting others into the business. Speci?cally, Trina Health authorized
certain ?rst-level individuals the right to sell to second-level investors exclusive rights to operate
Trina Health-af?liated diabetes treatment clinics within designated geographic areas. When a
second-level investor entered into an agreement to Operate Trina Health?af?liated clinics within a
designated geographic area and paid a license fee to Trina Health for doing so, the ?rst-level
individual who recruited the second-level individual would get a cut of that licensee fee as a
?nder?s fee.

5. T.M., a California resident, was the chief operating of?cer (COO) of Trina
Health.

B. CP Homes

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 3 of 57

6. CP Homes, LLC (CP Homes) was a Texas limited liability corporation. CP
Homes?s primary business was operating assisted living and memory?care residences in Texas
and Alabama.

7. T.G., a Texas resident, was the CEO of CP Homes.

8. AH, a Texas resident, was the COO of CP Homes.

9. AB, a Texas resident, was the public relations manager for CP Homes.

10. As described below, in or about 2014, CP Homes formed a wholly owned
subsidiary, APT Foley, LLC (APT Foley) for the purpose of opening and operating a Trina
Health-af?liated clinic in Foley, Alabama.

11. As described below, in or about 2015, CP Homes formed a wholly owned
subsidiary, APT Fairhope, LLC (APT airhope) for the purpose of opening and operating a Trina
Health-af?liated clinic in Fairhope, Alabama.

C. THCP and THCP Bham

12. C.B., a Georgia resident, was a friend and former business associate of Defendant
Gilbert?s.

13. As described below, in or about 2015, CB. formed Trina Health Care Partners
(THCP) as a Wyoming limited liability corporation. The purpose of THCP was to own
subsidiary entities. Those subsidiary entities would open and operate Trina Health-af?liated
clinics. C.B. was the controlling shareholder and CEO of THCP.

14. As described below, in or about 2015, CB. formed THCP Bham AI. 1, LLC
(THCP Bham) as 3 Wyoming limited liability corporation and a subsidiary of THCP. The
purpose of THCP Bham AL 1 was to open and operate a Trina Health?af?liated clinic in Hoover,

Alabama. CB was the CEO of THCP Bham.

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 4 of 57

15. M.K. was the organizer of a group of individuals who invested in THCP Bham.
D. BCBS-AL

16. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama (BCBS-AL) was a nonpro?t, private health
insurance company headquartered in Birmingham, Alabama. provided coverage to
over 3,000,000 people. That consisted of over 90 percent of the total market for health insurance
in Alabama.

17. BCBS-AL provided, through contracts with components of the government of the
state of Alabama, health care bene?ts to employees and retirees of the state government. When
added items or services to state employees? and retirees? health insurance plans, the
state of Alabama bore the cost of paying for such additional items or services. As such, the
question of whether BCBS-AL would cover the OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment constituted business, transactions, and series of transactions of the state of Alabama
involving things of value of $5,000 or more.

18. BCBS-AL operated a Network Integrity of?ce. This of?ce?s mission, in part, was
to ensure that BCBS-AL did not reimburse health care providers for items or services that were
not covered by a patient?s health insurance policy.

19. When Network Integrity of?cials of BCBS-AL requested that providers repay
money to BCBS-AL, the providers had certain appeal rights. The providers could ?rst
participate in a meeting with the Network Integrity of?cials and attempt to explain why the
money should not be repaid to This meeting was considered a ?rst-level review. If
the Network Integrity of?cials concluded, after the meeting, that the money was still owed, then
the providers could request a second?level review. That review would be completed by an

outside, independent consultant.

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 5 of 57

20. operated a Medical Policy of?ce. This of?ce?s mission, in part, was to
determine which medical items or services were medically necessary for the treatment of 
members, and, as such, would be covered under health insurance policies.

21. Lobbyist A was the Vice President, Governmental Affairs for BCBS-AL.

22. Attorney was an attorney who worked in the legal of?ce. He served
as Executive Counsel.

E. Regions Financial Corporation

23. Regions Financial Corporation (Regions) was a bank and ?nancial services
corporation headquartered in Birmingham.

24. In the course of its business activities, Regions extended loans and lines of credit
to customers who resided in Alabama.

25. Attorney A was an attorney employed by a law ?rm and retained by Regions to
pursue debt collection litigation when customers of Regions failed to repay loans.

F. Alabama State Government

26. Alabama was a state. The government of the state of Alabama received federal
assistance in excess of$ 10,000 during the one?year period beginning January 1, 2015 and ending
December 31, 2015. The government of the state of Alabama again received federal assistance
in excess of $10,000 during the one-year period beginning January 1, 2016 and ending December
31, 2016.

27. The Alabama Legislature was the legislative branch of the Alabama state
government. The Alabama Legislature was a bicameral body composed of the Alabama House
of Representatives and the Alabama Senate. The Alabama House of Representatives consisted

of 105 members with each member elected from a single-member district. The Alabama Senate

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 6 of 57

consisted of 35 members with each member elected from a single?member district.

28. Before being enacted into law, a bill had to be introduced into either the Alabama
House of Representatives or the Alabama Senate and then approved by a majority vote of both
bodies.

29. The Alabama Legislative Reference Services Agency (LRS) was a non?partisan
support agency of the Alabama Legislature. The LRS Legal Division provided bill drafting and
legal research services to the members of the Alabama Legislature. Before a member of the
Alabama Legislature could introduce a bill into one of the chambers, the LRS was required to
ensure that the draft bill satis?ed the Alabama Legislature?s style requirements. Accordingly, all
draft bills had to be submitted to the LRS before introduction. Only a member of the Alabama
Legislature, or a person speci?cally authorized by a member, could submit a draft bill to the
LRS.

30. The Speaker of the Alabama House of Representatives presided over that body.

31. All bills introduced into the Alabama House of Representatives were referred by
the Speaker to a standing committee. This was because Section 62 of the Constitution of
Alabama provided, ?No bill shall become a law until it shall have been referred to a standing
committee of each house, acted upon by such committee in session, and returned therefrom,
which facts shall af?rmatively appear upon the journal of each house.?

32. The Commerce and Small Business Committee was a standing committee of the
Alabama House of Representatives.

33. MD. was a member of the staff of the Small Business and Commerce Committee.
G. Alabama Legislators

34. Defendant-Representative Randall M. Davis was a member of the Alabama

House of Representatives. Davis represented House District 96, which consisted of portions of

6

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 7 of 57

Baldwin County and Mobile County, Alabama. As a member of the Alabama Legislature, Davis
was an agent of the state of Alabama. Davis was not a member of the Commerce and Small
Business Committee. During some or all of the relevant period, Davis was a member of the
majority party and was the Majority Whip of the Alabama House of Representatives.

35. Representative Micky Ray Hammon was a member of the Alabama House of
Representatives. Hammon represented House District 4, which consisted of portions of
Limestone County and Morgan County, Alabama. From in or about 2010 until in or about 2017,
Hammon was a member of the majority party and was the Majority Leader of the Alabama
House of Representatives. Hammon was also a member of the Commerce and Small Business
Committee. As a member of the Alabama Legislature, Hammon was an agent of the state of
Alabama. On or about September 25, 2017, Hammon pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud,

in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341. See United States v. Micky Ray

 

Hammon, N0. 2: (MD. Ala.). Hammon is, therefore, not charged in this
Superseding Indictment. Hammon was a close friend of Defendant?Representative Davis.

36. Representative Jack D. Williams was a member of the Alabama House of
Representatives. Williams represented House District 47, which consisted of portions of
Jefferson County, Alabama. Williams was a member of the majority party and was the chairman
of the Commerce and Small Business Committee of the Alabama House of Representatives.
Williams is not charged in this Superseding Indictment.

37. State Senator A was a member of the Senate. State Senator A represented all or
portions of Jefferson County and Shelby County, Alabama. State Senator A was perceived by
some other legislators as being able to in?uence 

38. State Representative A was a member of the Alabama House of Representatives.

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 8 of 57

State Representative A represented all or portions of Baldwin County, Alabama. State
Representative A was a diabetic. State Representative A was not a member of the Commerce
and Small Business Committee.

39. State Representative was a member of the Alabama House of Representatives.
State Representative represented all or portions of Clay County, Coosa County, and Talladega
County, Alabama. State Representative was known in the Alabama House of Representatives
as having expertise in health care-related legislation.

40. State Representative was a member of the Alabama House of Representatives.
State Representative represented all or portions of Bibb County, Chilton County, and Shelby
County, Alabama. State Representative was perceived by some other legislators as being able
to in?uence BCBS-AL.

41. State Representative was a member of the Alabama House of Representatives.
State Representative represented all or portions of Montgomery County, Alabama. State
Representative was a member of the Commerce and Small Business Committee.
F. Alabama Ethics Commission

42. The Alabama Ethics Commission was an agency of the Alabama state
government. Among the Alabama Ethics Commission?s duties were: (1) gathering and retaining
information regarding the economic interests of public of?cials; and (2) gathering and retaining
information regarding activities related to lobbying of state government of?cials.

43. Title 36, Section 36-25-14 of the Code of Alabama required that all public
of?cials, including legislators, submit to the Alabama Ethics Commission annual statements of
economic interest forms. On those forms, public of?cials were required to disclose, among other

things, any entity in which the public of?cial or his or her spouse held an ownership interest of

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 9 of 57

?ve percent or greater.

44. Title 36, Section 36-25-1 of the Code of Alabama de?ned ?lobbying,? in part, as
?promoting, opposing, or in any manner in?uencing or attempting to in?uence the introduction,
defeat, or enactment of legislation before any legislative body.? That section de?ned ?lobbyist,?
in part as person who receives compensation or reimbursement from another person, group,
or entity to lobby.? The section also de?ned ?principal,? as person or business which
employs, hires, or otherwise retains a lobbyist.?

45. Title 36, Section 36?25?18 of the Code of Alabama required that all lobbyists,
within 10 days of beginning lobbying activities, submit to the Alabama Ethics Commission
registration forms declaring their principals. Such forms were required to be signed by the
principal or the principal?s representative.

G. Lobbyists

46. Defendant-Lobbyist Martin J. Connors was a resident of Alabama and a lobbyist
registered with the Alabama Ethics Commission.

47. As noted, Lobbyist A was the Vice President, Governmental Relations for BCBS-
AL. Lobbyist A was, therefore, a lobbyist for BCBS-AL and BCBS-AL was the principal for
Lobbyist A.

48. Lobbyist a lobbyist registered with the Alabama Ethics Commission. A
Birmingham-based law ?rm employed Lobbyist B. As described below, from in or about
November of 2015 through in or about February of 2016, Lobbyist did lobbying work for CP
Homes and Trina Health.

49. Lobbyist was a lobbyist registered with the Alabama Ethics Commission.

Lobbyist owned a Montgomery-based contract lobbying ?rm. As described below, in or about

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 10 of 57

March of 2016, Lobbyist had meetings with Defendant Gilbert regarding the introduction of
legislation adverse to the interests of 

50. Lobbyist was a lobbyist registered with the Alabama Ethics Commission.
Lobbyist owned a Montgomery-based contract lobbying ?rm. As described below, from in or
about April of 2016 through in or about June of 2016, Lobbyist did lobbying work for Trina
Health.

II. ALABAMA LEGAL BACKGROUND

At all times relevant to this Superseding Indictment:

51. Title 13A, Section 13A-10-61 of the Code of Alabama provided,

A person commits the crime of bribery if:

(1) He offers, confers, or agrees to confer any thing of value upon a public servant

with the intent that the public servant?s vote, opinion, judgment, exercise of

discretion or other action in his of?cial capacity will thereby be corruptly

in?uenced; or

(2) While a public servant, he solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any pecuniary

bene?t upon an agreement or understanding that his vote, opinion, judgment,

exercise of discretion or other action as a public servant will thereby be corruptly
influenced.

52. Title 36, Section 36-25-5. l(a) of the Code of Alabama provided, ?No lobbyist,
subordinate of a lobbyist, or principal shall offer or provide a thing of value to a public employee
or public of?cial or to a family member of the public employee or family member of the public
of?cial; and no public employee or public of?cial or family member of the public employee or
family member of the public of?cial shall solicit or receive a thing of value from a lobbyist,
subordinate of a lobbyist, or principal.?

53. Title 36, Section 36-25-1(27) of the Code of Alabama provided, whenever used in

Chapter 25 of Title 36 of the Code of Alabama (consisting of the above-described sections), the

10

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 11 of 57

phrase ?public of?cial? meant: ?Any person elected to public of?ce, whether or not that person
has taken of?ce, by the vote of the people at state, county, or municipal level of government or
their instrumentalities, including govermnental corporations, and any person appointed to a
position at the state, county, or municipal level of government or their instrumentalities,
including governmental corporations.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND
A. March of 2009: CMS Issues 2009 Non-Coverage Decision Memorandum

54. On or about December 23, 2009, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
(CMS) issued a decision memorandum stating that CMS had determined that ?evidence [did] not
support a conclusion that outpatient intravenous insulin therapy improves health
outcomes in Medicare bene?ciaries.? Accordingly, CMS announced that it would not cover the
cost of such therapy, like the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment provided by Trina Health. On or
about March 30, 2010, CMS issued a revised decision memorandum. That revised memorandum
did not change the substantive portions of the December 23, 2009 memorandum. Many private
health care bene?t plans generally followed coverage determinations.

55. Around the time that it issued the non-coverage decision memorandum, CMS
assigned a Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System code for OIVIT. That code
was G9147. CMS instructed health care providers to use that code when submitting claims for
OIVIT. Because the ?rst character in the code was the CMS computer systems would
recognize the code as being for a non-covered treatment and then deny the claim. Private health
care bene?t programs generally required health care providers to use codes when
submitting claims. Those programs also would deny claims that began with the symbol 

56. After CMS issued its non?coverage decision memorandum, Trina Health began to

enter into license agreements with individuals and businesses. Those agreements authorized the

11

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 12 of 57

licensees to open Trina Health-af?liated clinics in designated geographic locations. The
agreements obligated the licensees to pay Trina Health ?xed sums for each new clinic
established, ?xed sums for each chair installed within a new clinic, and percentages of annual
gross pro?ts. By 2015, Trina Health?af?liated clinics operated in various places, including
California, Mississippi, Arizona, Nevada, and India.

B. 2014 and Early 2015: Trina Health Expands Into Southern Alabama

57. On or about February 3, 2014, Trina Health entered into a license agreement with
CP Homes for CP Homes to open Trina Health-af?liated clinics in southern Alabama. In or
about August of 2014, APT Foley, a subsidiary of CP Homes, opened a Trina Health-af?liated
clinic in Foley. In or about February of 2015, APT Fairhope, also a subsidiary of CP Homes,
opened a Trina Health-af?liated clinic in Fairhope.

58. Although CMS and BCBS-AL did not cover OIVIT, the Foley and Fairhope Trina
Health-af?liated clinics initially generated revenue. The clinics were pro?table because the
Trina Health billing employees refrained from using the HCPC code of G9147 on the claims
they submitted to CMS, BCBS-AL, and other health care bene?t programs. Rather, they
submitted claims using the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes assigned to the
component parts of the treatment. This form of health care fraud?manipulating and altering
billing codes so as to maximize reimbursement?is commonly referred to as ?unbundling,? As a
result of this unbundling, health care bene?t programs paid around $600 per three-hour treatment
session.

C. 2014 and Early 2015: CB. Prepares to Open Trina Health-Af?liated Clinics in
Northern Alabama

59. In or about 2013, CB, a longtime acquaintance of Defendant Gilbert?s, became

interested in opening a Trina Health?af?liated clinic. After studying diabetes rates in various

12

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 13 of 57

areas, C.B. decided that he wanted to open a clinic in Alabama. He based this decision on the
fact that Alabama had one of the country?s highest diabetes rates nationally.

60. CE. did not personally have the funds necessary to open a Trina Health-af?liated
clinic. Thus, he recruited investors. In or about May of 2014, CB. contacted Representative
Hammon, a person with whom C.B. had participated in previous business deals. .B. knew that
Hammon did not personally have any funds available to invest in opening a Trina Health?
af?liated clinic. However, C.B. hoped that, in light of the political of?ce Hammon held,
Hammon would be able to put QB. in contact with individuals who were able and willing to
invest in a Trina Health-af?liated clinic.

61. Upon ?nding out about the business opportunity, Representative Hammon shared
the details of the opportunity with Defendant-Representative Davis, Hammon?s close friend.
Like Hammon, Davis lacked suf?cient funds to invest in a Trina Health-af?liated clinic.
However, Davis was interested in the venture. Accordingly, both Hammon and Davis agreed to
actively try to ?nd people willing and able to invest in a Trina Health-af?liated clinic to be
located in northern Alabama. C.B. promised both Hammon and Davis that he (C.B.) would
convey a ?ve-percent ownership interest in the to?be?formed business to any person who
recruited an investor. On or about May 26, 2014, Davis sent an email to CB. accepting 
offer. In that email, Davis wrote that he hoped that they would ?make millions on this deal.?

62. From in or about May of 2014 through in or about April of 201 5, Representative
Hammon and Defendant-Representative Davis actively solicited investments in a northern
Alabama Trina Health?af?liated clinic venture. In or about February of 2015, Hammon, Davis,
and CB. toured the airhope Trina Health~af?liated clinic. During this tour, Hammon, Davis,

and CB. met Defendant Gilbert, who was visiting Alabama from his California home. Gilbert

13

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 14 of 57

proceeded to describe to Hammon, Davis, and CB. how the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment
worked. He also assured them that any northern Alabama Trina Health-af?liated clinic would
perform a public service and would be pro?table.

63. Meanwhile, in or about February of 201 5, CB. formed THCP. C.B. was the
controlling shareholder of THCP. C.B. intended for THCP to be the majority owner of
subsidiary corporations that C.B. intended to establish. The subsidiary corporations would own
and operate Trina Health-af?liated clinics. Soon after its formation, THCP entered into a license
agreement with Trina Health. Under that agreement, THCP acquired exclusive rights to open
clinics in Alabama and various other locations. For these rights, THCP agreed to pay Trina
Health: (1) $100,000 for each new clinic established; (2) fees of $16,000 for each chair installed
in each new clinic (with each clinic having a minimum of 12 chairs); and (3) a royalty fee of 5
percent of the gross revenues of each clinic. THCP also agreed to pay an additional 5 percent of
gross revenues to Trina Health in exchange for Trina Health performing billing services for
Trina Health-af?liated clinics.

64. In or about May of 2015, Representative Hammon identi?ed a group of investors
who were willing and able to provide sufficient funding to open a Trina Health-af?liated clinic
in the Birmingham area. In light of the promise of ?mding, on or about June 1, 2015, CB.
formed THCP Bham AL 1, LLC (THCP Bham), a Wyoming limited liability corporation and a
subsidiary of TCHP. THCP Bham existed to operate, as a sub-licensee of THCP, a Trina
Health-af?liated clinic in the metropolitan area surrounding Birmingham. C.B. was the
president of THCP Bham. Around the same time, C.B. established an account in the name of
THCP Bham at a Wells Fargo Company (Wells Fargo) bank branch.

65. In or about May of 2015, four investors?led by M.K. and each recruited through

14

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 15 of 57

Representative Hammon?s marketing efforts~wired a total of $390,000.00 into the bank account
held by THCP Bham. In exchange for recruiting these investors, THCP Bham paid Hammon
$12,500.00. THCP Bham CEO C.B. also offered Hammon a ?ve percent interest in THCP
Bham. Because Alabama law would have required Hammon to disclose?on annual statement
of economic interest forms he was required to ?le with the Alabama Ethics Commission?an
ownership interest of ?ve percent or more in any ?rm, Hammon asked that C.B. grant him an
interest of less than ?ve percent. Accordingly, C.B. gave Hammon a four percent ownership
interest in THCP Bham. Hammon paid nothing for that ownership interest.

66. From in or about May of 2015 through in or about September of 2015,
Representative Hammon labored to open 3 Tuna Health-af?liated clinic in the Birmingham area.
For example, Hammon worked with a real estate agent to locate of?ce space that could be rented
and converted into a clinic. He ultimately found a location on Lorna Road in Hoover, Alabama.
Hammon then negotiated a lease with the owner of the of?ce space. A?er doing so, Hammon
oversaw the tenant improvements necessary to convert the of?ce space into a suitable Arti?cial
Pancreas Treatment clinic. Hammon also assisted TCHP Bham CEO QB. in hiring a physician
who would serve as the clinic?s ?medical director,? and thus oversee the treatments provided at
the clinic. During this period, THCP Bham paid Hammon approximately $16,000.00 to
compensate him for the work he was doing.

67. Also during this period, Defendant-Representative Davis continued to actively
recruit investors into the new Hoover Trina Health-af?liated clinic or into other prOSpective
Trina Health-af?liated clinics to be opened in Alabama. For example, on or about June 25,
2015, Davis sent an email to Representative Hammon. In that email, Davis wrote that he had ?a

meeting with Gov. Bentley this morning and two potential investors this afternoon.? He closed

15

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 16 of 57

the message by writing, ?It is nice to be out of Session and totally focused on this great

healthcare model.?

D. Spring and Sumer of 2015: BCBS-AL Decides Not to Reimburse for the Arti?cial
Pancreas Treatment and Requests Refunds

68. In or about March of 2015, of?cials within the BCBS-AL Network Integrity
of?ce began investigating whether the claims submitted on behalf of the health care providers
employed by the Trina Health-af?liated clinic in Foley were ?unbundled.? That is, the BCBS-
AL of?cials sought to determine whether those claims contained fragmented billing codes
intended to maximize revenue. To make that determination, the BCBS-AL of?cials obtained
medical records from the Foley Trina Health?af?liated clinics. Upon a close examination of
those records, the BCBS-AL of?cials determined that the medical services provided at the Foley
clinic constituted OIVIT. As such, BCBS-AL determined that the claims submitted for the
providers should have included the HCPC code G9147. However, the claims were unbundled in
that they did not consist of the single code G9147, but rather consisted of several CPT codes
representing the various component parts of the treatment. The claims submitted included the
CPT codes for: (1) a glucose blood test; (2) an outpatient of?ce visit for an established patient;
(3) an outpatient of?ce visit for a new patient; (4) therapeutic, prophylactic, and diagnostic
injections and infusions; and (5) use of an infusion pump in the of?ce setting.

69. On or about May 26, 2015, the Network Integrity of?cials sent letters
to the health care providers employed by the Trina Health?af?liated clinic in Foley. Those letters
requested that each provider refund to BC BS-AL money wrongly paid to reimburse for Arti?cial
Pancreas Treatments. Subsequently, on or about May 26, 2015, BCBS-AL sent additional letters
to the Foley providers. Those letters explained the basis for refund request. In the

letters, stated that the treatment provided at the clinic did ?not meet Blue Cross and

16

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 17 of 57

Blue Shield of Alabama?s medical criteria for coverage and is considered investigational due to
the lack of published peer-reviewed literature.? The letters instructed the providers to ?please
insure that claims for are billed appropriately with code for the correct
application of our member?s bene?ts.? Upon receipt of these letters, the providers shared them
with company of?cials at CP Homes. The CP Homes of?cials then transmitted them to
Defendant Gilbert.

70. On or about May 30, 2015, Defendant Gilbert sent a letter to the health care
providers employed by the Trina Health-af?liated clinic in Foley. In that letter, Gilbert wrote,
?Trina Health is very con?dent that BCBS of Alabama has no proper basis for the claims made.?
He then assured them that Trina Health would provide legal representation for them in any
coverage dispute with BCBS-AL. At the conclusion of the letter, Gilbert wrote, ?Finally, the
Alabama Legislature is likely to pass a special private bill recognizing the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment as a preferred model of treatment.?

71. On or about June 9, 2015, Defendant Gilbert sent two letters to 
Senior Network Integrity Representative. He wrote the letters on the letterhead of ?Law Of?ce
of G. Ford Gilbert.? In those letters, he appealed refund requests made to the two
health care providers employed by the Trina Health-af?liated clinic in Foley.

72. On or about July 21, 2015, the Medical Policy of?ce of BCBS-AL issued a draft
policy memorandum regarding (another term for OIVIT). In that memorandum, the
of?cials concluded, ?Chronic intermittent intravenous insulin therapy does not meet Blue Cross
and Blue Shield of Alabama?s medical criteria for coverage and is considered investigational.?
In reaching this conclusion, the of?cials stated that ?[t]he published evidence is considered

insuf?cient to determine that the use of in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes 73 the

17

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 18 of 57

net health outcome.?

73. On or about July 31, 2015, BCBS-AL Network Integrity of?cials sent letters to
the health care providers employed by the Trina Health?af?liated clinic in Fairhope. Those
letters requested that each provider refund to money wrongly paid to reimburse for
Arti?cial Pancreas Treatments.

74. On or about August 3, 2015, the health care providers employed by the Trina
Health-af?liated clinics in Foley participated in ?rst?level appeal meeting with the BCBS-AL
Network Integrity of?cials. Defendant Gilbert attended the meeting as the legal counsel for the
health care providers. During that meeting, Gilbert argued that the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment
was not a form of OIVIT and was thus not subject to the G9147 code requirement. He also
requested a subsequent meeting with the BCBS-AL Medical Policy of?cials so that he could
urge BCBS-AL to reconsider its decision not to cover OIVIT. After the meeting, the Network
of?cials denied the ?rst-level appeal and asked that the providers refund the money.

75. On or about August 15, 2015, Defendant Gilbert sent a letter to 
Senior Network Integrity Representative stating his intention of representing the health care
providers employed by the Trina Health-af?liated clinic in airhope in their appeals of the July
31, 2015 refund requests. In that letter, he asked that dispense with a ?rst-level
appeal of the refund determination and proceed to a second-level, independent review of the
refund determination.

76. On or about August 20, 2015, Defendant Gilbert sent a letter to 
Senior Network Integrity Representative. In that letter, he accused the BCBS-AL of?cials of
using the August 3, 2015 meeting as ?a sham tactic to lure Medical Providers into a sense of

believing that a proper meeting on appeal would be held, when there was no intention by

18

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 19 of 57

Insurance Company to do so.? Gilbert requested a second-level, independent review of BCBS-
denial of the refund appeal of the health care providers employed by the Trina Health-
af?liated clinic in Foley.

IV. THE CHARGES

COUNT 1
(Conspiracy)

77. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 76 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.
78. Beginning in or about February of 201 5 and continuing until in or about June of
2016, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District of Alabama, and elsewhere, the
defendants,
G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?
MARTIN J. CONNORS, and
RANDALL M. DAVIS,
as well as others, both known and unknown, including, but, not limited, to, Representative Micky
Hammon, did knowingly and intentionally conspire, combine, and agree with themselves and
others, to commit offenses against the United States, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 371.
OBJECTS OF THE CONSPIRACY
79. It was an object of the conspiracy to corruptly give, offer, and agree to give
anything of value to any person intending to in?uence or reward an agent of the state of Alabama

in connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions involving anything of value

of $5,000.00 or more of the state of Alabama, a government that receives more than $10,000.00

19

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 20 of 57

under a federal program during any one?year period, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 666(a)(2); and

80. It was an object of the conspiracy to corruptly solicit, demand, accept, and agree
to accept anything of value from any person intending to be in?uenced or rewarded in
connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions involving anything of value
of $5,000.00 or more of the state of Alabama, 3 government that receives more than $10,000.00
under a federal program during any one-year period, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 

PURPOSE OF THE CONSPIRACY

81. The purpose of the conspiracy was for Defendant Gilbert to persuade or force
BCBS-AL to cover OIVIT and for Representative Hammon and Defendant?Representative Davis
to enrich themselves. To achieve these goals, the defendants agreed that Gilbert would provide
things of value to Hammon and to Davis as gratuities for and to induce Harnmon and Davis to
use political clout to bene?t Trina Health and its af?liated entities by:

a. Corruptly in?uencing and attempting to corruptly in?uence, and causing
other public of?cials to corruptly in?uence and attempt to corruptly in?uence 
determination as to whether it would voluntarily cover OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment offered at Trina Health-af?liated clinics, with that determination constituting the
business of a government agency involving anything of value of $5,000.00 in light of the effect
that coverage of OIVIT would have on insurance premiums paid by the Alabama
state government to to obtain health insurance for state employees;

b. Causing other members of the Alabama Legislature for the purpose of
causing those legislators to take of?cial action bene?cial to Trina Health and its af?liated entities

on the following questions, matters, proceedings, or controversies, with each involving the

20

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 21 of 57

business of a government agency involving things of value of more than $5,000.00: (1) the
question of whether a bill would be introduced in the Alabama House of Representatives that
would have the effect of requiring BCBS-AL to cover (2) the question of whether a bill
having the effect of requiring to cover OIVIT would be assigned to a committee
wherein such bill would receive favorable treatment; and (3) the question of whether the
Alabama House of Representatives Commerce and Small Business Committee would vote to
advance a bill having the effect of requiring BCBS-AL to cover OIVIT.

MANNER AND MEANS

82. It was part of the conspiracy that Defendant Gilbert, personally and through Trina
Health and its af?liated entities, would and did give things of value to Representative Hammon.
Gilbert?s giving of things of value consisted of: (1) in or about February of 2015, making
Hammon a ?rst-level seller of territorial rights to open Trina Health-af?liated clinics within
designated geographic areas, thus allowing Hammon to receive ?nder?s fees for selling territorial
rights to second?level investors; (2) in or about February of 2015, Gilbert personally intervening
with a creditor of Hammon on Hammon?s behalf asking that the creditor allow Hammon
additional time to repay an unpaid loan; (3) on or about April 7, 2016, Gilbert, through Trina
Health, making a payment to Hammon in the amount of $2,000; and (4) on or about May 12,
2016, Gilbert personally informing the creditor of Hammon?s that Trina Health was willing to
repay Hammon?s outstanding debt obligation.

83. It was part of the conspiracy that Defendant Gilbert, personally and through Trina
Health and its af?liated entities, would and did give things of value to Defendant?Representative
Davis. Gilbert?s giving of things of value consisted of: in or about February of 2015, making
Davis a ?rst-level seller of territorial rights to open Trina Health-af?liated clinics within

designated geographic areas, thus allowing Davis to receive ?nder?s fees for selling territorial

21

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 22 of 57

rights to second-level investors.

84. It was part of the conspiracy that, in anticipation of receiving gratuities from
Defendant Gilbert and in return for receiving bribes from Gilbert, Representative Hammon
would and did use his in?uence as a legislator to cause other legislators?including Defendant-
Representative Davis, Representative Williams, State Senator A, and State Representative A?to
advise and pressure BCBS-AL to: (1) drop the demands for repayment made to the health care
providers employed by the Foley and airhope Trina Health?af?liated clinics; and (2) voluntarily
begin reimbursing for OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment offered at Trina
Health-af?liated clinics.

85. It was part of the conspiracy that, in anticipation of receiving gratuities from
Defendant Gilbert and in return for receiving bribes from Gilbert, Defendant-Representative
Davis would and did advise and pressure BCBS-AL to: (1) drop the demands for repayment
made to the health care providers employed by the Foley and Fairhope Trina Health-af?liated
clinics; and (2) voluntarily begin reimbursing for OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment offered at Trina Health-af?liated clinics.

86. It was part of the conspiracy that, in anticipation of receiving gratuities from
Defendant Gilbert and in return for receiving bribes from Gilbert, Defendant-Representative
Davis would and did use his influence as a legislator to cause other legislatorsrincluding State
Representative C?to advise and pressure BCBS-AL to: (1) drop the demands for repayment
made to the health care providers employed by the Foley and Fairhope Trina Health-af?liated
clinics; and (2) voluntarily begin reimbursing for OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment offered at Trina Health-af?liated clinics.

87. It was part of the conspiracy that, knowing that Representative Hammon

22

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 23 of 57

anticipated to receive and had received things of value from Defendant Gilbert, Trina Health, and
Trina Health-af?liated entities, and with a purpose of aiding Hammon to obtain things of value
from Gilbert, Trina Health, and Trina Health?af?liated entities, Defendant-Representative Davis
would and did advise and pressure BCBS-AL to: (1) drop the demands for repayment made to
the health care providers employed by the Foley and airhope Trina Health-af?liated clinics; and
(2) voluntarily begin reimbursing for OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment offered
at Trina Health-af?liated clinics.

88. It was part of the conspiracy that, in or about February of 2016, when 
declined to voluntarily begin reimbursing for OIVIT, such as the Arti?cial Pancreas Therapy
offered at Trina Health-af?liated clinics, Defendant Gilbert would and did seek to introduce a
bill in the Alabama House of Representatives that would have an effect of requiring 
to cover OIVIT. Gilbert would and did intend to use the bill to accomplish the objective of
obtaining coverage for the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment in either of two possible ways: (1) the
Alabama Legislature would pass the bill and the Governor would then sign it, thus creating a
statutory mandate that cover the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment; or (2) through the
holding of a public hearing on it, the bill would generate signi?cant negative publicity for
BCBS-AL, thus causing BCBS-AL to voluntarily cover OIVIT, including the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment offered at Trina Health-af?liated clinics.

89. It was part of the conspiracy that Defendant Gilbert would and did attempt to
corruptly in?uence Representative Hammon in connection with any business, transaction, or
series of transactions of the state of Alabama involving anything of value of $5,000 or more, that
is, to act so as to advance the bill supported by Trina Health.

90. It was part of the conspiracy that Defendant?Lobbyist Connors would and did

23

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 24 of 57

Gilbert. From Gilbert and Representative Hammon, Connors would and did learn that Gilbert
had given and would give things of value to Hammon and to Defendant?Representative Davis to
corruptly in?uence those legislators. Based on this knowledge and at Gilbert?s direction,
Connors would and did attempt to to corruptly in?uence Hammon in connection with a series of
transactions of the state of Alabama involving anything of value of $5,000 or more.

91. It was part of the conspiracy that Defendant-Representative Davis, because
Defendant Gilbert had given and would give things of value to Davis and to Representative
Hammon, would and did take the following official actions: (1) advising and pressuring another
member of the Alabama House of Representatives?State Representative B?to amend a
previously introduced bill to add to the bill a provision that would have the effect of requiring
to cover (2) testifying before the Commerce and Small Business Committee
in support of a stand-alone bill that would have the effect of requiring BCBS-AL to cover
and (3) advising and pressuring other members of the Alabama House of Representatives
to support such a bill.

92. It was part of the conspiracy that Defendant Gilbert would and did seek to conceal
Representative Hammon?s efforts to assist Trina Health in causing BCBS-AL to cover OIVIT.
To do so, Gilbert would and did refer to Hammon by the alias name ?Bill Johnson? in written
communications and in all telephonic conversations involving third parties.

OVERT ACTS
93. In furtherance of the conspiracy, Defendant Gilbert, Defendant-Lobbyist Connors,

and Defendant-Representative Davis, along with Representative Hammon and Representative

24

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 25 of 57

Williams, THCP Bham CEO C.B., CP Homes CEO T.G., CP Homes COO A.H., and others

committed one or more of the following overt acts.

A. February through September of 2015: Gilbert Recruits Hammon and Davis to
Assist in a Lobbying Campaign Against BCBS-AL

94. In or about February of 201 5, Defendant Gilbert agreed to make Representative
Hammon and Defendant-Representative Davis resellers of territorial rights for Trina Health?
af?liated clinics. As such, Hammon and Davis had Opportunities to receive ?nder?s fees from
the proceeds of any sales of territorial rights to open Trina Health-af?liated clinics.

95. On or about August 12, 2015, A.H., the COO of CP Homes, emailed Defendant
Gilbert. In that email, A.H. informed Gilbert that CP Homes was ?ready to launch PR
campaign? against decision to not cover OIVIT.

96. In or about August of 2015, on a conference telephone call, Defendant Gilbert
informed Representative Hammon, THCP Bham CEO C.B., and the Hoover clinic?s ?nancial
backers of requests for refunds from the health care providers employed by the
Trina Health-af?liated clinics in southern Alabama and draft policy statement
denying coverage of OIVIT. Gilbert assured the listeners that he would be able to persuade
BCBS-AL to reconsider its position regarding coverage of OIVIT. Based on Gilbert?s
assurances, Hammon, C.B., and the investors decided to proceed with plans to open the Hoover
clinic in September of 2015.

97. Soon after that conference telephone call, Representative Hammon contacted
Defendant-Representative Davis and informed him of the billing dispute between BCBS-AL and
the Foley and Fairhope Trina Health?af?liated clinics. Davis assured Hammon that he would do

anything that he could to help Trina Health in persuading BCBS-AL to reconsider its position

regarding coverage of OIVIT.

25

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 26 of 57

98. On or about September 3, 2015, CP Homes COO A.H. met with Defendant-
Representative Davis regarding the coverage dispute with The following day, A.H
emailed Defendant Gilbert, writing, ?Met with State Rep Randy Davis, who has taken very strong
interest in APT clinics since opening, offered unsolicited help. Potential conference call with
BCBS government representative in Montgomery next week, will invite Ford . . . . Follow up
actions . . . . Letters to state agency, BCBS, elected officials.?

B. September of 2015: Hammon Sells His Interest in THCP Bham So As to Distance
Himself Publicly From Gilbert?s Lobbying Effort

99. As Trina Health and its associates began to plan a lobbying effort, Representative
Hammon sought to distance himself from THCP Bham and Trina Health. To that end, in or
about September of 2015, Hammon sold two percent of his ownership interest in THCP Bham to
an investor from Albertville, Alabama. For that two percent interest, Hammon received a
payment of $35,320.00.

100. On or about September 22, 2015, Representative Hammon deposited a cashier?s
check payable in that amount into his personal bank account. The check was drawn on THCP
Bham?s Wells Fargo bank account. After the transaction, Hammon had a smaller interest in the
Hoover Trina Health-affiliated clinic. However, the level of Hammon?s day-to-day involvement
in the clinic?s Operations and the intensity of Hammon?s efforts to secure for Trina Health a
favorable resolution of the coverage dispute with remained unchanged after the
transaction.

C. September 15, 2015: THCP Bham?s Hoover Trina Health-af?liated Clinic Opens

101. On or about September 15, 2015, the Hoover Trina Health?affiliated clinic held a
grand opening ceremony. At the request of Representative Hammon, the Governor of Alabama,

Robert Bentley, attended the ceremony. Also in attendance were Hammon, THCP Bham CEO

26

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 27 of 57

C.B., Defendant Gilbert, and CP Homes COO A.H. Due to Governor Bentley?s attendance, the
event received signi?cant local media attention.

102. On or about September 16, 2015, CP Homes COO A.H. sent an email to CF
Homes CEO T.G. A.H. wrote the following:

Hi 

Here are the updates for the trip in past two days:

1. Open house on Tuesday got great media coverage basically because governor
was there . . . .

3. Birmingham has 3 major owners: Micky Hammon (leader of majority partyspoke to all three of them and introduced myself and CP
Homes. . . . All three of them are aware of BCBS issue and are Optimistic about it.

4. I had a meeting with Micky and [Trina Health COO about BCBS. Micky
reassured that he had Randy Davis (whip of majority party) work on it and we
should keep contacting Randy about the progress. Micky will also bring in his
friends (congressmen. . .etc.) who carry BCBS to treat for more leverage force. He
did not worry about the issue and con?dent that it will be solved. However, he
couldn?t provide a timeline when can we expect it to be done. His strategy is
leaning towards ?making friends? with BCBS.



D. October and November 2015: Hammon and Davis Assist with Efforts to Lobby
BCBS-AL

103. During in or about September of 201 5, CP Homes continued to prepare a public
relations campaign against BCBS-AL. During that time, at the direction of CP Homes of?cials,
Defendant-Representative Davis, in coordination with CP Homes of?cials, contacted various

of?cials of 

27

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 28 of 57

104. On or about October 1, 2015, CP Homes, on behalf of the Trina Health?af?liated
clinics in Foley and Fairhope, issued a press release. The press release stated, CROSS
BLUE SHIELD OF ALABAMA DENIES LIFE-CHANGING COVERAGE TO DIABETICS
Largest insurance provider in state of Alabama denies claims and retroactively bills for
previously approved claims.? Defendant Gilbert and Defendant-Representative Davis, along
with Representative Hammon, personally received this press release. When he received it,
Hammon sent an email to TCHP Bham CEO C.B. Hammon?s email read: 

105. In or about October of 2015, Representative Hammon contacted State Senator A.
Hammon asked State Senator A to contact BCBS-AL and ask BCBS-AL to consider covering
the treatments offered by the Trina Health-af?liated clinics. On or about October 7, 2015, at
Hammon?s request, State Senator A contacted BCBS-AL Lobbyist A regarding Trina Health.

106. On or about October 19, 2015, CP Homes COO A.I-I. sent an email to Defendant
Gilbert, reporting that BCBS-AL of?cials had sent letters to the Foley and airhope Trina
Health-af?liated clinics. In those letters, the BCBS-AL of?cials had not appeared willing to
work with CP Homes to ?nd an amicable resolution to the coverage dispute. She asked, ?Should
we send these to Randy Davis??

107. Also on or about October 19, 2015, CP Homes Public Relations Manager A.B.
sent an email to Defendant-Representative Davis. In that email, A.B. informed Davis that CP
Homes was about to start a public relations campaign against She acknowledged that
Davis was ?in the midst of discussions with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama in an effort to
set a meeting with the president and other decision makers.? On or about the following day,
Davis responded to A.B. He wrote that the public relations campaign had surprised him. Davis

instructed, ?Please in the future when I am intervening on your behalf that you make me aware.?

28

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 29 of 57

108. In or about October of 2015, Defendant Gilbert unveiled a public relations and
lobbying campaign against BCBS-AL of his own. He dubbed the campaign ?BlueGate, the
Committee Against BCBS Abuses.? Components of the BlueGate plan included: (1) launching a
public opinion campaign; (2) ?ling a complaint in the Circuit Court of Baldwin County alleging
state law tort claims; (3) ?ling a complaint in a federal court alleging claims under the Racketeer
In?uenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act;
(4) obtaining the support of unions and other labor organizations, including the Alabama
Education Association; and (5) advocating for the enactment of a state law that would require
BCBS-AL to cover the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment. In light of the lobbying goal and the
public scrutiny that would follow if Representative Hammon were linked to a legislative effort
designed to bene?t a company with which he was associated, Hammon asked that Gilbert refrain
from publicly linking him (Hammon) with BlueGate. Gilbert agreed to do so. Thereafter,
Gilbert began referring to Hammon by the alias name ?Bill Johnson? in written and oral
communications relating to Trina Health and its dispute with BCBS-AL.

109. On or about October 27, 2015, Defendant Gilbert disseminated by email to
various individuals, including THCP Bham CEO C.B., a strategy memorandum detailing his
goals for the BlueGate campaign. In that email, Gilbert wrote that he was not sending the email
to ?Bill Johnson,? and he asked C.B. to do so. Thereafter, C.B. forwarded the email to
Representative Hammon. Hammon then forwarded it to Defendant-Representative Davis.

110. In or about November of 2015, Representative Hammon persuaded State
Representative A, himself a diabetic, to visit the Trina Health-af?liated clinic in FairhOpe for a
consultation. During that consultation, the health care provider at the clinic reported that State

Representative A was a candidate for the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment. State Representative A

29

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 30 of 57

then agreed to accept a publicly available offer of four free treatment sessions in exchange for
signing a petition requesting that BCBS-AL start covering OIVIT like the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment. Thereafter, the administrator of the Fairhope Trina Health-af?liated clinic sent an
email to CPI-I Homes COO A.H. In that email, the administrator reported that State
Representative A was ?willing to take on the fight for us.? Subsequently, that email was
forwarded to Hammon and to Defendant-Representative Davis. When Davis received the email,
be responded, ?Let?s keep working. Randy Davis.?
E. November of 2015: Trina Health and Medical Policy Of?cials Meet

1 11. During in or about November of 201 5, Defendant Gilbert exchanged a series of
emails with administrative personnel regarding the scheduling of a meeting between
Trina Health representatives and the Medical Policy of?ce of BCBS-AL. In those emails, the
parties ultimately agreed to meet on November 30, 2015. Gilbert, THCP Bham CEO .B., and
others forwarded many of those emails to Representative Hammon and Defendant?
Representative Davis. For example, on or about November 10, 2015, Gilbert forwarded to CB.
a copy of an email he received from a administrative assistant. Gilbert blind carbon
copied Hammon on the forwarded email. In the text, Gilbert wrote, ?Dear bill G. Ford Gilbert.?

1 12. On or about November 10, 2015, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Defendant-
Representative Davis. In that email, Gilbert wrote,

Dear Randy,

I am sure you recall our meetings. I was so thankful and impressed that you are

such an active part of the State?s system to protect Alabamans. (I still call myself

a ?Son of the City of the Vulcan?). I know that you have seen some of the successes

of normalizing metabolism, and now we see successes in some stroke and dementia

patients.

We want to be the good people here. We want to have a win-win with BCBS, but
they are not being proper. Other Blue Cross Blue Shield continue to pay (after

30

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 31 of 57

being ordered by Court), and even that was not interesting to them.

The Committee has come up with the list of items, and put Nov. 12 as the launch

date. This is because we were to work with BCBS. But they showed their colors

again, by saying ?come present on Nov. 30, but we don?t think it has anything to

do with asking the doctors for money.? If they were proper people, they would

have said ?come present, and we will see if this is good.? But they did not.

So, I invite you to call me, day or night, to work with Alabamans (present and

away), to do what needs to be done. My cell . . . . The nice thing is that you can

tell me anything and it will not go farther than you direct, and cannot be pried out

of me . . . [ellipses in original] that way we don?t have to worry about being

misunderstood.

Thank you for your service to our people.

G. Ford Gilbert

1 13. On or abOut November 12, 2015, Defendant-Representative Davis replied to
Defendant Gilbert?s November 10, 2015 email, writing have worked a bit behind the scenes to
determine what your next step might be.? Davis then asked whether Gilbert planned to
simultaneously proceed with the November 30 meeting with BCBS-AL and the BlueGate
campaign. Later that day, Gilbert replied that he planned to ??le one or two actions, make sure
BlueGate is in full swing and then show them the money we will save.? Gilbert thanked Davis
for Davis?s help. Later that day, Davis replied, ?Glad to help. We need this program moving
again.?

114. On or about November of 2015, Defendant-Representative Davis contacted State
Representative regarding Trina Health?s dispute with BCBS-AL. Davis asked State
Representative to contact BCBS-AL and see if BCBS-AL would consider reversing its

position regarding coverage of OIVIT. Aware of Representative Hammon?s previous

involvement with BCBS-AL and Davis?s close relationship with Hammon, State Representative

31

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 32 of 57

asked Davis whether Davis was acting for the purpose of bene?tting Hammon. Davis replied
that he was motivated only by a desire to help the diabetic patients who resided in his legislative
district.

115. On or about November 12, 2015, Defendant Gilbert sent a sharply worded email
to a physician employed by the Medical Policy of?ce of BCBS-AL. In that email, Gilbert
accused the physician of being biased against Trina Health. Gilbert blind carbon COpied
Representative Hammon and Defendant-Representative Davis. Thereafter, Davis emailed
Hammon. In that email, he referred to Gilbert as ?aggressive and rude.? He went on to write
that he ?had [State Representative willing to listen? before Gilbert sent the above-described
email to the BCBS-AL physician.

116. In or about November of 2015, Representative Hammon recommended to
Defendant Gilbert that Trina Health retain a lobbyist to assist in the upcoming meeting with
Hammon recommended a good friend of his, Lobbyist B. Thereafter, Gilbert
persuaded CP Homes CEO T.G. that CP Homes should hire Lobbyist B. T.G. agreed to do so.

117. On or about November 30, 2015, at the of?ce of Lobbyist B, a meeting of
individuals af?liated with Trina Health occurred. Attending that meeting were: Representative
Hammon, Lobbyist B, CP Homes CEO T.G., THCP Bham CEO C.B., some of the investors in
THCP Bham, and Defendant Gilbert. During that meeting, they strategized regarding the
meeting with Medical Policy of?cials, which was to occur later that day.

118. Later on or about November 30, 2015, on the Hoover campus of 
corporate headquarters, almost all of the above?described individuals met with 
of?cials. Representative Hammon did not attend the meeting, nor was his af?liation with Trina

Health mentioned during the meeting.

32

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 33 of 57

1 19. After the meeting, on or about December 6, 2015, CP Homes CEO T.G.
organized a conference telephone call to occur that day for the purpose of discussing ?the BCBS
status.? He invited to the call Defendant Gilbert, CP Homes COO A.H., Lobbyist B, and THCP
Bham CEO C.B. After T.G. sent the email inviting those individuals to the conference telephone
call, Gilbert responded, assume you want . . . Bill Johnson, whom I copy here.? Gilbert blind
carbon copied Representative Hammon on the reply.

F. January and February of 2016: BCBS-AL Denies Trina Health?s Appeal of the
Medical Policy Decision Not to Cover OIVIT

120. On or about January 15, 2016, APT Fairhope (the subsidiary of CP Homes
operating the Fairhope Trina Health-af?liated clinic) issued two checks payable to BCBS-AL.
The checks were to cover the refunds that requested in July of 201 5 that the Fairhope
clinic?s health care providers pay. One check was in the amount of $1,080.56; the other was in
the amount of $19,498.71. Also on or about that date, APT Foley (the subsidiary of CP Homes
operating the Foley Trina Health-af?liated clinic) issued two checks payable to BCBS-AL. The
checks were to cover the refunds that BCBS-AL requested in July of 2015 that the Foley clinic?s
health care providers pay. One check was in the amount of $3,404.81; the other was in the
amount of $17,801.52. The payment of these refunds ended the health care providers? appeal of
the refund request made by the Network Integrity officials at BCBS-AL. However, at that time,
Trina Health was still awaiting ?nal decision on its appeal of the Medical Policy
office?s decision not to cover, going forward, OIVIT.

121. When Defendant Gilbert learned that the CP Homes subsidiaries had paid the
health care providers? debts, he sent an email to CP Homes COO A.H. In that email, Gilbert
wrote, ?I?m glad we did this thing with the Doctors, 1 am going to rub it in where it really hurts.?

He also stated that he was ready to ?pull the trigger.?

33

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 34 of 57

122. On or about February 5, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to a BCBS-AL
of?cial. In that email, Gilbert accused of having wrongly decided to deny coverage
for OIVIT. Gilbert wrote, ?The Trina treatment is uniformly results in wonderful outcomes for
the patient.? Gilbert blind carbon copied Representative Hammon.

123. On or about February 17, 2016, Defendant Gilbert received ?'om BCBS-AL its
formal decision denying Trina Health?s appeal of the Medical Policy decision to not cover
OIVIT. Thereafter, Gilbert drafted a letter he intended to send to BCBS-AL in response to its
denial of the appeal. On or about February 20, 2016, Gilbert sent by email a copy of that draft
letter to Representative Hammon. Gilbert wrote that he hoped that the dra? letter would ?go
well with a jury.? Later on or about that day, Hammon responded to Gilbert and suggested that
Gilbert work into his letter an allegation that, by denying coverage for OIVIT, was
contravening its slogan, which was ?We cover what matters.? Thereafter, on or about February
20, 2016, Gilbert sent to CF Homes CEO T.G., CP Homes COO A.H., THCP Bham CEO C.B.,
and others, a revised draft of the letter to BCBS-AL. In the email to which Gilbert attached the
draft, Gilbert wrote, ?Bill Johnson had the tag line of BCBSAL which is we cover what matters,
so I played on that.? Gilbert blind carbon copied Hammon on that last email.

G. February of 2016: Gilbert Intervenes For Hammon with Hammon?s Creditors

124. In or about March of 2015, an Alabama state court entered a consent judgment
ordering Representative Hammon to pay to Regions unpaid principal and interest on an overdue
loan. The state court ordered Hammon to pay approximately $245,000.00. The judgment
permitted Hammon to make payments of approximately $1,000 for a period of 12

months. After that 12-month period, Hammon was obligated to repay the remaining unpaid

amount.

34

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 35 of 57

125. By in or about February of 201 6, Representative Hammon still owed
approximately $241,846.28. Under the judgment, Hammon had only one month to pay the full
amount. Sometime in or about February of 2016, Hammon informed Defendant Gilbert that he
would be unable to pay the ?ll amount, which was due in March of 2016.

126. On or about February 1, 2016, Representative Hammon sent an email to
Defendant Gilbert informing Gilbert of the identity of Regions Attorney A, the attorney retained
by Regions to negotiate the collection of the outstanding debt. In that email, Hammon wrote,

?Thanks for your help Ford.?

127. On or about February 13, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Regions
Attorney A. In that email, Gilbert wrote:

Dear [Attorney 

I know from trying to catch you in, you are exceedingly busy. Therefore I will
make this email concise.

Micky Hammon has been working on the massive diabetes problem of Alabama
for over a year. Through his funding and associates, he was able to get our company
to open 3 clinics in Alabama, (Hoover, airhope and Foley).

The goal of course was to help the people of Alabama and use funds to pay off the
debt to your bank. Everything was going exceedingly well, governor Bentley was
at the clinic opening ceremony cutting the red ribbon, and it never occurred to us
that Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama would refuse to pay for the treatment since
other BSBC [sic] in all our other states always pay for the treatment. In fact, in
California there was a lawsuit over payment, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, Aetna,
and a number of other insurance companies were all ordered to pay including the
massive CalPers (State of California).

This has been a setback but, but not a knockout blow since Medicare is still paying.
However, since Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama has a virtual monopoly of 85%
insurance coverage, the other clinics are not Opening until BCBSAL starts to pay.
Since the treatment is so effective, it should not be long before this matter is decided
favorably.

35

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 36 of 57

Please allow me to facilitate payment that is helpful to all. I?m sorry that I missed
you again, and apparently Mr. Hammon has called and not gotten through due to
your busy schedule. He remains available to con?rm that it is appropriate to talk
with me.

Very truly yours.

Ford Gilbert, JD 
Trina Health

Gilbert blind carbon copied Representative Hammon. On or about the following day, Hammon
sent an email to Gilbert. In that email, he wrote, ?Great letter. Thank you Ford.?

128. On or about February 17, 2016, Defendant Gilbert participated in a telephone call
with Regions Attorney A. During that conversation, Gilbert told Attorney A that he (Gilbert)
and Representative Hammon were trying to open diabetes treatment clinics in Alabama and that
Hammon stood to receive a signi?cant amount of money when new clinics opened. Gilbert
encouraged Attorney A to allow Hammon more time to repay the loan.

129. Later on or about February 17, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Regions
Attorney A. In that email, Gilbert thanked Attorney A for ?listening to [Gilbert?s] life?s story
and how that affected Mr. Hammon.? Gilbert concluded the letter by writing, look forward to
completing the plans we started with Micky Hammon.?

130. On or about March 1, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent another email to Regions
Attorney A. In that email, Gilbert appeared to offer that Trina Health would repay
Representative Hammon?s debt. Gilbert wrote that he was ?ready to write the instructions from
the Bank to Trina Health for Trina to pay the Bank first, with an ongoing payment plan at the
same time.?

131. Throughout this period, dun'ng private conversations, Defendant Gilbert assured

Representative Hammon that, as soon as Trina Health or Gilbert had suf?cient funds, payment of

36

 

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 37 of 57

Hammon?s debt to Regions would be made. Hammon understood this promise to be related to
Gilbert?s efforts to persuade Hammon to facilitate the enactment of a bill that would effectively
require BCBS-AL to cover the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment.

132. Subsequently, Regions granted Representative Hammon an extension of an
unspeci?ed length to repay the loan.

H. February of 2016: Gilbert Prepares to Have a Bill Introduced in the Alabama
Legislature and Hires Connors

133. By in or about February of 201 6, Defendant Gilbert was preparing to pursue the
introduction of a bill in the Alabama Legislature that would require BCBS-AL to cover the
Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment. Gilbert asked Representative Hammon to sponsor such a bill, but
Hammon refused.

134. In or about February of 2016, in an email, CP Homes COO A.H. asked Lobbyist
to draft such a bill ?for Mr. Johnson.? However, Lobbyist declined to do so, citing a con?ict
of interest between his ?rm and Thereafter, Lobbyist withdrew from representing
Trina Health.

135. At Lobbyist B?s recommendation, CP Homes subsequently retained Defendant?
Lobbyist Connors to lobby for the enactment of a bill requiring to cover Arti?cial
Pancreas Treatment. CP Homes T.G., CP Homes COO A.H., and the other of?cials at CP
Homes instructed Connors that he could work under the direction of Gilbert.

136. On or about February 25, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to CF Homes
CEO T.G. and CP Homes COO A.H. In that email, he wrote, ?Dear and You will
love our new lobbyist. He is already at work even though he is on the steering committee for the
local Senator. His name is Marty Connors . . . . Let me put a conference call together.? Gilbert

blind carbon copied Representative Hammon.

37

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 38 of 57

137. In or about February of 2016, Defendant-Representative Davis met with
Representative Williams and asked Williams to support a bill that would require health insurance
companies operating in Alabama to cover the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment. Williams
understood that such a bill would almost singularly bene?t a company in which Representative
Hammon had a ?nancial interest. In part as a favor to Hammon, Williams agreed to support
such a bill.

138. On or about February 26, 2016, Defendant Gilbert, Representative Williams, and
THCP Bham CEO C.B. met for dinner at a Birmingham restaurant. During that dinner, the
group discussed the bill that Gilbert wanted introduced and enacted. Williams informed Gilbert
that he (Williams) would ensure that the bill was assigned to the committee he chaired, the
Commerce and Small Business Committee. Williams further promised that, once the bill was
assigned to his committee, Williams would hold a hearing on the bill. Williams hoped that the
holding of a hearing would cause BCBS-AL to negotiate with Trina Health. After the dinner,
Williams contacted Hammon and informed Hammon of his (Williams?s) plan to assist Trina
Health and Hammon in the upcoming legislative effort.

139. On or about February 29, 2016, CP Homes COO AH. sent a signed consulting
agreement to Defendant-Lobbyist Connors. In the email to which the agreement was attached,
A.H. asked that Connors maintain complete con?dentiality. However, Connors was permitted to
share information with Defendant Gilbert.

1. March of 2016: Gilbert Drafts a Bill and Has it Introduced

140. On or about March 1, 2016, Defendant?Lobbyist Connors sent an email to

Defendant Gilbert and CP Homes CEO TO. The subject line of the email was ?Something to

watch (HB In that email, Connors wrote, ?Rep. Randy Davis learned of [State

38

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 39 of 57

Representative who is ?ghting a similar issue with BCBS on cancer drugs with a speci?c bill
HB86. I?ve asked Randy if he will ask [State Representative to include us. [The Chairman of
the Insurance Committee] has not brought it up in House Insurance yet. Just one of a number of
suggestions."

141. Later on or about March 1, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent a response to Defendant?
Lobbyist Connors. In that response, he wrote, think I should try to weave in the Trina
treatment. As soon as I am able, I will send my weave.? Also on or about March 1, 2016,
Connors replied, ?Yes, had a strategic chat with Majority Leader tonight before I got to the
Senator Shelby event. Will update in detail but basically we?ll need language for a second bill to
H86 to be assigned to a different committee, hopefully Commerce (Williams). 1?11 and the
Leader will be back with Randy Davis regarding amendments to [State Representative B?s] HB
86.?

142. On or about March 5, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Defendant-
Lobbyist Connors. The subject line was ?Modi?ed Attached to the email was a revised
version of House Bill (H.B.) 86 that included references to OIVIT. Gilbert had written the
revised draft bill. The draft bill would have had the effect of requiring BCBS-AL to cover
OIVIT. In the email attached to the bill, Gilbert wrote that the bill ?belongs in Commerce as it is
to save money for both the bene?ts provider and the patient.? Gilbert blind carbon copied
Representative Hammon.

143. Approximately ?ve minutes later, also on or about March 5, 2016, Defendant-
Lobbyist Connors forwarded Defendant Gilbert?s email containing the draft bill to Defendant?
Representative Davis and to Representative Williams.

144. Subsequently, Defendant-Representative Davis asked State Representative 

39

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 40 of 57

whether State Representative would be willing to amend the existing bill, H.B. 86, so that H.B.
86 would have the effect of requiring to cover OIVIT like the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment. State Representative responded that the proponents of H.B. 86 were unwilling to
support an amendment. However, State Representative offered to Davis that he would be
willing to sponsor a stand-alone bill backed by Trina Health.

145. On or about March 8, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to CF Homes CEO
T.G. and CP Homes COO A.H. In that email, Gilbert discussed a meeting he hadjust had with
Lobbyist C. Representative Hammon had placed Lobbyist in contact with Gilbert. During the
meeting, Gilbert and Lobbyist had discussed a plan to introduce a separate bill that would have
the effect of disbanding BCBS-AL. Gilbert speculated to T.G. and AH. that the threat of a bill
to disband BCBS-AL might cause to not oppose a bill to require BCBS-AL to cover
OIVIT. According to Gilbert, Defendant-Representative Davis might be willing to sponsor the
bill to disband BCBS-AL. In the email Gilbert wrote that Lobbyist did not realize that
?Mickey and Randy Davis with Jack Williams could deliver the entire house.?

146. In or about early March of 2016, Defendant?Lobbyist Connors asked
Representative Hammon to authorize him (Connors) to submit Defendant Gilbert?s dra? bill to
the LRS for the purposes of formatting the bill for introduction on the ?oor of the Alabama
House of Representatives. Hammon reminded Connors that it would be unlawful for him to
have overt involvement in the legislative process and that authorizing Connors to submit the
draft to the LRS on Hammon?s behalf would be considered overt involvement. Hammon
suggested that Connors obtain Representative Williams?s authorization to submit the draft bill on
Williams?s behalf. Subsequently, at Hammon?s direction, Connors asked Williams for

authorization to submit the draft bill on Williams?s behalf. Williams agreed and contacted the

40

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 41 of 57

LRS to inform the staff that Connors had his (Williams?s) authority to submit draft bills on
Williams?s behalf.

147. On or about March 9, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent to Defendant-Lobbyist
Connors an email. The subject line of the email was ?here is HB (number to be assigned).
In that email, Gilbert wrote, hope this seems as proper to you as it does to me. Ford.?
Attached to the email was a draft bill written by Gilbert that would have had the effect of
requiring BCBS-AL to cover OIVIT like the Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment. The bill would have
done so by adding, among others, the following provision to the Code of Alabama:

A health bene?t plan that covers intravenous insulin infusion by a health care

provider in a hospital, must cover intravenous insulin infusion by a health care

provider in a clinic, and may not require a higher copayment, deductible, or

coinsurance amount for intravenous insulin infusion in a clinic, regardless of the

formulation or bene?t category speci?ed in the health bene?t plan.
This provision would have had the effect of requiring BCBS-AL to cover OIVIT because
inpatient intravenous insulin infusion was recognized as a medically necessary treatment in the
hospital setting and, therefore, was a standard part of most bene?t plans. Therefore, under the
terms of the bill, for BCBS-AL to continue to cover inpatient intravenous insulin infusion,
BCBS-AL would have been required to also start covering OIVIT, like the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment. Gilbert blind carbon copied Representative Hammon and Defendant-Representative
Davis on the email sending the draft bill.

148. On or about March 9, 2016, Defendant-Lobbyist Connors sent an email to an
employee of the LRS. In that email, Connors wrote, ?Under the permission of Rep. Jack
Williams (Vestavia) please draft the following legislation awaiting signature of [State

Representative and/or others." Attached to the email was the draft bill prepared by Defendant

Gilbert.

41

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 42 of 57

149. On or about March 11, 2016, A.B., the public relations manager for CP Homes,
sent an email to Defendant Gilbert, CP Homes CEO T.G., CP Homes COO A.H., THCP Bham
CEO CB, and Representative Hammon. All recipients were visibly carbon copied on the email.
The subject line of the email stated ?Blue Gate Roll Out Strategy.? In that email, A.B. listed
various tasks to be performed related to a public relations campaign against BCBS-AL. Among
those items was ?Micky to obtain and share political email list, if possible.? The following day,
Defendant Gilbert emailed all of the recipients of email. In his email, Gilbert wrote, 
don?t think that Rep. Hammon, being a sitting congressman should be part of this, or any emails
as he is not involved.? Less than one minute later, Gilbert sent another email to all of the
recipients of email?except for Representative Hammon. In the second email, Gilbert
wrote only, which was intended to represent a smiling face.

150. On or about March 15, 2016, State Representative introduced the bill ?rst
drafted by Defendant Gilbert onto the ?oor of the Alabama House of Representatives. The
legislation was assigned the number H.B. 415. Soon thereafter, Representative Williams
approached a member of the staff of the Speaker of the Alabama House of Representatives.
Williams asked the staff member to ensure that the Speaker assigned H.B. 415 to his committee,
the Commerce and Small Business Committee. The staff member agreed to do so. Thereafter,
the Speaker assigned H.B. 415 to the Commerce and Small Business Committee.

J. Early April of 2016: Public Hearing on H.B. 415, During Which Davis Speaks In
Support of the Bill

151. Soon after the bill arrived in Representative Williams?s committee, lobbyists
opposed to H.B. 415 ?led of?cial requests for a public hearing on the bill. Williams scheduled a
public hearing on H.B. 415 for April 13, 2016.

152. On or about April 4, 2016, Defendant Gilbert emailed the health care providers

42

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 43 of 57

employed by the Trina Health?af?liated clinics in Foley and Fairhope. In the email, he informed
them of the date of the public hearing and asked that they attend. Gilbert wrote that he hoped
that the hearing would ?be such a newsworthy event, that the bill will pass or at least Blue Cross
Blue Shield of Alabama will recant.? Gilbert blind carbon c0pied Representative Hammon.

153. On or abOut April 7, 2016, Defendant Gilbert, through an account controlled by
Trina Health, wired and caused to be wired $2,000 into Representative Hammon?s bank account.

154. On or about April 11, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Defendant?
Lobbyist Connors, Representative Williams, Defendant-Representative Davis, and others. In
that email, Gilbert reported that he had come ?straight from Mexico City? and was ?already here
in Alabama.? He stated that he was ?working to get additional people to come? to the public
hearing. Gilbert blind carbon COpied Representative Hammon.

155. At some point on or before April 13, 2016, Defendant?Representative Davis
contacted the of?ce of the Clerk of the Alabama House of Representatives. Davis asked that an
employee of that of?ce attend the public hearing on H.B. 415 and video record the proceedings.
The of?ce agreed to send an employee to make such a recording.

156. At some point on or before April 13, 2016, Representative Hammon contacted
State Representative A and asked State Representative A if he would attend the public hearing
on H.B. 415 and, during that hearing: (1) describe his experiences as a patient of the Trina
Health?af?liated clinic in Fairhope; and (2) urge the members of the committee to support the
bill. State Representative A agreed to do so.

157. At some point on or before April 13, 2016, Representative Hammon invited
Defendant Gilbert to attend a weekly luncheon of the members of the Alabama House of

Representatives majority party caucus. Subsequently, on or about an unknown date on or before

43

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 44 of 57

April 13, 2016, Gilbert attended such a luncheon. At the luncheon, Defendant-Representative
Davis introduced Gilbert as someone who was working to combat the diabetes problem in
Alabama.

158. On or about April 13, 2016, Representative Williams presided over a public
hearing on H.B. 415. During that hearing, Defendant Gilbert, Defendant?Representative Davis,
and State Representative A testi?ed in support of H.B. 415 and advised the members of the
committee to vote in favor of the bill. A physician employed by BCBS-AL spoke in opposition
to the bill. Also during the hearing, Representative Hammon stood in the hallway outside of the
committee?s meeting room and tried to overhear the proceedings.

K. Late April of 2016: Gilbert and Connors Lobby Committee Members to Support
H.B. 415

159. On or about April 14, 2016, Defendant-Lobbyist Connors sent an email to
Defendant Gilbert, copying Defendant?Representative Davis and Representative Williams. In
that email, Connors stated that he had just spoken with Williams and that Williams had agreed to
have his staff person disseminate to the members of the committee a letter written by Gilbert and
promotional materials prepared by Gilbert.

160. Later on or about April 14, 2016, Defendant?Lobbyist Connors sent an email to
M.D., a member of the staff of the Commerce and Small Business Committee. In that email, he
wrote, ?As we just discussed and as Chairman Williams has authorized, can you distribute this to
the full Commerce Committee?? Attached to that email was the letter written by Defendant
Gilbert and the promotional materials prepared by Gilbert. Connors carbon copied
Representative Williams. Later that day, M.D. replied to Connors, have forwarded your email
with the attachments on to the Commerce and Small Business Committee Members.?

Thereafter, on or about that day, Connors sent to Defendant?Representative Davis email

44

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 45 of 57

con?rming the sending of the materials. Davis then forwarded the email to Representative
Hammon.

161. On or about April 16, 2016, Defendant Gilbert emailed State Representative D, a
member of the Commerce and Small Business Committee. The purpose of the email was to
encourage State Representative to support H.B. 415. Gilbert blind carbon copied
Representative Hammon.

162. On or about April 15, 2016, Defendant-Lobbyist Connors traveled out of the
United States on a planned vacation. Before leaving, Connors requested that Lobbyist D, a
friend of his, lobby on behalf of Defendant Gilbert during Connors?s absence. Lobbyist 
agreed to do so.

163. On or about April 17, 2016, Lobbyist ?led documents with the Alabama
Secretary of State registering himself as a lobbyist for Trina Health and CP Homes. On that
document, Lobbyist listed Trina Health as a principal. On or about April 17, 2016, Defendant
Gilbert signed a document con?rming that Trina Health was a principal and that Lobbyist was
its registered lobbyist.

164. On or about April 18, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent to Lobbyist a statement
supporting H.B. 415 written by Gilbert. Gilbert wanted Lobbyist to give the statement to State
Representative for State Representative to read to the Commerce and Small Business
Committee before the committee voted on H.B. 415. Gilbert blind carbon copied Representative
Hammon on the email.

165. On or about April 19, 2016, the Commerce and Small Business Committee was
scheduled to vote on H.B. 415. However, shortly before the committee?s meeting was to occur,

Representative Williams pulled H.B. 415 from the agenda.

45

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 46 of 57

L. Late April and May of 2016: Gilbert Tries to Use the Threat of Legislative Action
to Pressure BCBS to Reimburse for Outpatient Intravenous Insulin Injection
Therapy
166. On or about April 22, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent to Representative Hammon a

draft of a letter Gilbert intended to send to BCBS-AL of?cials. In that draft letter, Gilbert wrote

that he had ?necessary votes to get HB 415 out of committee.?
167. On or about April 30, 2016, Defendant Gilbert emailed Representative Williams.

Gilbert wrote in the email, ?Dear Chairman Williams: Attached is our formal letter as suggested.

Please call me at your earliest convenience . . . . Thank you very much. Ford.? Attached to the

email was a letter to Williams. At the top of the letter, Gilbert wrote that the letter was ?For

Transmission to, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama (hand delivered).? The subject of the letter

was: ?Potential Resolution.? In the letter, Gilbert wrote:

Dear Chairman Williams:
Thank you for your attempts to fashion a resolution to the problem of BCBSAL

having misrepresented the facts and the ef?ciency of the Arti?cial Pancreas
Treatment? to the House Committee.

3. Alabama Medical Doctors appealed, but were extorted by ?Network Integrity?
to stop their appeal. Thus, there exist 3 items to resolve, a) the actions of BCBSAL
to these doctors, b) the actions of BCBSAL as to denying coverage without a single
case of failure and without review of the patients charts or all the clinical trials, and
c) the statements to your Committee.

4. A proposal was submitted to your Committee for BCBSAL to allow high-user
patients, and those facing amputations to be covered, and then have Board Certi?ed
UAB physicians verify that millions of dollars are saved (not to mention the
restoration of health for these severely ill patients.) To make this a ?nancial win
either way, the clinics offer to return 200% (double) the payments if any patient is
hospitalized, or any patient?s pending amputation goes forward.

46

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 47 of 57

6. The agreement and then presentation must take place by May 10'h as I am a
personal all aspect guest of the King of Saudi Arabia and his physicians to hold a
large conference on the They have arranged this after Visiting clinics and
sending physicians to review what we do. It is sad that we get better treatment in
Mexico, China, India, Taiwan, Canada, South Africa, and now Saudi Arabia than I
do in my home state.

7. So, please offer this one last overture to BCBSAL to avoid the above 3 including
RICO etc. by being proper scientists who seek only truth. We are the ?good guys?

and do not deserve the treatment we have received to date. It can be remedied
easily, or not. The decision is entirely BCBSAL.

Sincerely yours,

G. Ford Gilbert, JD, 
On or about May 4, 2016, Williams forwarded Gilbert?s April 30, 2016 email, with the attached
letter, to BCBS-AL Lobbyist A.

168. On or about May 7, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to BCBS-AL Lobbyist
A. In that email, Gilbert wrote, ?Chairman Williams asked that I communicate directly with you
about a resolution." Gilbert then proposed that he and Lobbyist A engage in con?dential
negotiations. Gilbert concluded the letter by writing, will report to Rep. Jack Williams that I
have suggested this more direct communication.?

169. When Lobbyist A did not respond to Defendant Gilbert?s
May 7, 2016 email, on or about May 9, 2016, Gilbert sent Lobbyist A a second email. In that
second email, Gilbert noted that he was ?under a major time restraint.? Gilbert asked Lobbyist A
to ?please respond in some way to my prior email (of ust 2 days ago) so that I can report to
several people. The offer to work together must be accepted or rejected within the next few

days.? Subsequently, later on or about May 9, 2016, Lobbyist A replied to Gilbert. Lobbyist A

47

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 48 of 57

wrote that Representative Williams ?asked that Blue Cross Blue Shield communicate directly
with [Gilbert].? Lobbyist A then suggested that, going forward, Gilbert negotiate with 
AL Attorney B.

170. On or about May 11, 2016, BCBS-AL Attorney sent a letter, as an attachment
to an email, to Defendant Gilbert. The attorney wrote, ?Chairman Jack Williams asked that we
respond directly to you regarding your correspondence dated April 30, 2016. Please accept this
as clari?cation of the facts.? The attorney then explained why BCBS-AL would not cover
OIVIT, like Arti?cial Pancreas Treatment. He stated, ?Based on our extensive review,
[Artificial Pancreas Treatment] remains non?covered due to lack of well?respected, published
peer-reviewed clinical evidence and data to support improved net health outcomes.? The
attorney carbon copied Representative Williams and BCBS-AL Lobbyist A on the email.

171. On or about May 1 1, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent as an attachment to an email to
Defendant-Lobbyist Connors, Lobbyist D, CP Homes CEO TO. and others a draft of a letter he
intended to send to the BCBS-AL attorney, BCBS-AL Attorney B. In the email preceding the
draft, he wrote, ?This is my draft letter. I am making it aggressive because it is to attorneys . . . .
I would like to do a ?rolling thunder? approach . . . In the draft letter, Gilbert wrote, in part,

This is not a reimbursement issue, this is an issue regarding an ?insurance company?

which has lied to the House Committee, has extorted the submission of physicians,

has ruled on medical issues when they said they wanted more information, has paid

monstrous salaries and bonuses to executives . . . has lobbied for legislation to

cover up their inequities, and has established a one-person ?death panel? who then

misled the House.
Gilbert blind carbon copied Representative Hammon. Subsequently, T.G. advised Gilbert to
refrain from sending the letter. Gilbert then sent another email stating that he would not send the

letter. In that second letter, he stated, ?Mr. Johnson says that it is unusual for an invitation to

[Attorney to take place. So I will call him and take his temperature, say nothing specific and

48

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 49 of 57

report back.?

172. On or about May 12, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent to Defendant?Lobbyist
Connors and Lobbyist an email. He blind carbon copied Representative Hammon. In the
email, Gilbert informed Connors that ?Mr. Johnson? was also receiving the email. Gilbert then
wrote, don?t think I?ve ever wanted to be more vindictive than I want to be with Blue Cross
Blue Shield Alabama.?

173. On or about an unknown date before June 28, 2016, Defendant-Representative
Davis obtained ??om the of?ce of the Clerk of the Alabama House of Representatives copies of
the recorded videos of the April 13, 2016 hearing. On or about June 28, 2016, Davis attempted
to electronically transmit those copies to Defendant Gilbert.

M. May of 2016: Gilbert Prepares for Future Legislation and Offers to Repay
Hammon?s Debt

174. In or about May of 2016, Defendant Gilbert began discussing with Representative
Hammon the possibility of introducing legislation during the 2017 session of the Alabama
Legislature that would be helpful to Trina Health and adverse to BCBS-AL. Gilbert asked
Representative Hammon to assist with such legislative efforts??either overtly or covertly.

175. On or about May 12, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Representative
Hammon asking for information regarding who to contact with Regions relating to Hammon?s
debt, which was still unpaid and due. Hammon emailed that information to Gilbert.

176. Later on or about May 12, 2016, Defendant Gilbert sent an email to Regions
Attorney A. In that email, Gilbert informed Attorney A that Trina Health was about to become
pro?table. He proposed that when Trina Health became pro?table, Representative Hammon?s
?bill will be paid directly from Trina from fees due.? Gilbert proposed that Regions and Trina

Health enter into a contract obligating Trina Health to repay Hammon?s debt.

49

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 50 of 57

177. Subsequently, Regions granted Representative Hammon another extension of an
unspeci?ed length to repay the loan.
All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.

COUNT 2
(Bribery Concerning a Program Receiving Federal Funds)

178. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 177 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

179. In or about February of 2015, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District
of Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?

aiding and abetting another, and aided and abetted by another, directly and indirectly, corruptly
did give, offer, and agree to give a thing of value to a public of?cial with intent to in?uence a
public of?cial in connection with a transaction and series of transactions involving $5,000 or
more; that is, Defendant Gilbert offered and gave to Representative Hammon the right to be a
?rst?level seller of territorial rights to open Trina Health-af?liated clinics within designated
geographic areas, thus allowing I-Iamrnon to receive ?nder?s fees for selling territorial rights to
second?level investors, in order to corruptly in?uence Hammon, as opportunities arose.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 201(b)(l)(A) and Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2.


(Bribery Concerning a Program Receiving Federal Funds)

180. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 179 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

181. In or about February of 201 6, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District

50

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 51 of 57

of Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?

aiding and abetting another, and aided and abetted by another, directly and indirectly, corruptly
did give, offer, and agree to give a thing of value to a public of?cial with intent to in?uence a
public of?cial in connection with a transaction and series of transactions involving $5,000 or
more; that is, Defendant Gilbert offered and gave to Representative Hammon assistance in
causing a creditor of Hammon?s, Regions, to grant Hammon an extension of time to repay his
outstanding debt, in order to corruptly in?uence Hammon, as opportunities arose.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 201(b)(1)(A) and Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2.

COUNT 4
(Bribery Concerning a Program Receiving Federal Funds)

182. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 181 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

183. On or about April 7, 2016, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District of
Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?

aiding and abetting another, and aided and abetted by another, directly and indirectly, corruptly
did give, offer, and agree to give a thing of value to a public official with intent to in?uence a
public of?cial in connection with a transaction and series of transactions involving $5,000 or
more; that is, Defendant Gilbert offered and gave to Representative Hammon $2,000, in order to

corruptly in?uence Hammon, as opportunities arose.

51

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 52 of 57

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 201(b)(1)(A) and Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2.

COUNT 5
(Bribery Concerning a Program Receiving Federal Funds)

184. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 183 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

185. On or about May 12, 2016, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District of
Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?

aiding and abetting another, and aided and abetted by another, directly and indirectly, corruptly
did give, offer, and agree to give a thing of value to a public of?cial with intent to in?uence a
public of?cial in connection with a transaction and series of transactions involving $5,000 or
more; that is, Defendant Gilbert offered and gave to Representative Hammon an offer made to
Hammon?s creditor, Regions, to personally repay Hammon?s outstanding debt if the creditor
granted Hammon additional time to repay the debt, in order to corruptly in?uence Hammon, as
opportunities arose.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 201(b)(1)(A) and Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2.

COUNT 6
(Violation of the Travel Act)

186. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 185 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

187. On or about April 1 1, 2016, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District of

Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

52

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 53 of 57

G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?

traveled in interstate and foreign commerce from Mexico to Montgomery, Alabama with the
intent to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and facilitate the promotion, management,
establishment, and carrying on of an unlawful activity, to wit: (1) bribery involving a principal of
a lobbyist, in violation of Title 36, Section of the Code of Alabama; (2) bribery, in
violation of Title 13A, Section 13A-10-61 of the Code of Alabama; and (3) bribery concerning a
program receiving federal funds, in Violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 666(a)(2),
as alleged in Counts 2 through 6 of this Superseding Indictment, and thereafter performed and
attempted to perform an act to promote, manage, establish and carry on, and to facilitate the
promotion, management, establishment and carrying on of such unlawful activity.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1952(a)(3).

COUNT 7
(Violation of the Travel Act)

188. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 187 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

189. Between in or about April of 2016 through in or about June of 2016, in
Montgomery County, within the Middle District of Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?

used a facility in interstate or foreign commerce, namely, email communications, with the intent
to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and facilitate the promotion, management,
establishment, and carrying on of an unlawful activity, to wit: (1) bribery involving a principal of
a lobbyist, in violation of Title 36, Section of the Code of Alabama; (2) bribery, in

violation of Title 13A, Section of the Code of Alabama; and (3) bribery concerning a

53

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 54 of 57

program receiving federal funds, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 666(a)(2),
as alleged in Counts 2 through 6 of this Superseding Indictment. All in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section l952(a)(3).

COUNT 8
(Violation of the Travel Act)

190. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 189 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.

191. On or about June 28, 2016, in Montgomery County, within the Middle District of
Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

RANDALL M. DAVIS,

used a facility in interstate or foreign commerce, namely, email communications, with the intent
to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and facilitate the promotion, management,
establishment, and carrying on of an unlawful activity, to wit: (1) bribery involving a principal of
a lobbyist, in violation of Title 36, Section of the Code of Alabama; (2) bribery, in
violation of Title 13A, Section of the Code of Alabama; and (3) bribery concerning a
program receiving federal funds, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 666(a)(2),
as alleged in Counts 2 through 6 of this Superseding Indictment. All in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1952(a)(3).

COUNT 9
(Making a False Statement)

192. The factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 191 of this Superseding
Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated herein as if copied verbatim.
193. On or about November 29, 2016, in Montgomery County, within the Middle

District of Alabama, and elsewhere, the defendant,

54

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 55 of 57

MARTIN J. CONNORS,

did willfully and knowingly make a materially false, ?ctitious, and fraudulent statement and
representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the government of
the United States, by stating to a United States Postal Inspector that he (Connors) did not know,
during the period that H.B. 415 was pending before the Alabama Legislature, that Representative
Hammon was a part-owner and investor in a Trina Health-af?liated clinic. The statement was
false because, as Connors then and there knew, Connors did know, during the period that H.B.
415 was pending before the Alabama Legislature, that Hammon was a part?owner and investor in
a Trina Health-af?liated clinic.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001.

FORFEITURE 

A. The allegations contained in Counts 1 through 8 of this superseding indictment are
hereby realleged and incorporated by reference for the purpose of alleging forfeitures pursuant to
Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section
2461(0).

B. Upon conviction of the offenses in violation of Title 18, United States Code,

Sections 371 and l952(a)(3), set forth in Counts 1 through 8 of this superseding
indictment, the defendants,
G. FORD GILBERT,
a/k/a ?Gregory Gilbert,?
MARTIN J. CONNORS, and
RANDALL M. DAVIS,
shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C)

and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any and all property, real or personal,

55

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 56 of 57

constituting or derived from proceeds defendants obtained directly or indirectly as a result of the
said violations including, but not limited to, a Forfeiture Money Judgment.
C. If any of the property described in this forfeiture allegation, as a result of any act

or omission of the defendants:

(1) cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

(2) has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;

(3) has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court;

(4) has been substantially diminished in value; or

(5) has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without
difficulty,

the United States shall be entitled to forfeiture of substitute property pursuant to Title 21, United
States Code, Section 853(p), as incorporated by Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c).

All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(l)(C) and Title 28, United
States Code, Section 2461(0).

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION-Z

A. The allegations contained in Count 9 of this superseding indictment are hereby
realleged and incorporated by reference for the purpose of alleging forfeitures pursuant to Title 18,
United States Code, Section 982(a)(7).

B. Upon conviction of the offenses in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1001 set forth in Count 9 of this superseding indictment, the defendant,

MARTIN J. CONNORS,

shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(7), any

and all property, real or personal, constituting or derived from proceeds the said defendant obtained

56

 

Case Document 69 Filed 07/24/18 Page 57 of 57

directly or indirectly as a result of the offenses in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
1001 including, but not limited to, a Forfeiture Money Judgment.
C. If any of the property described in this forfeiture allegation, as a result of any act or

omission of the defendant:

(1) cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

(2) has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;

(3) has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court;

(4) has been substantially diminished in value; or

(5) has been commingled with other pr0perty which cannot be divided without
dif?culty,

the United States shall be entitled to forfeiture of substitute property pursuant to Title 21, United
States Code, Section 853(p), as incorporated by Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c).

All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(7).

A TRUE BILL:

WW

Foreperson


V. FMKLIN, SR.
UNIT STATESA RNEY
L.

Jox?tthan? 
Assistant 

 

     

 

R. Randolph Neeley
Assistant United States Attorney

57