- A federal jury convicted two brothers for operating a multi-million dollar racketeering and Medicaid fraud conspiracy.
- The scheme involved defrauding Pennsylvania Medicaid of over $32 million through nominee-owned dental practices.
- Defendants utilized fraudulent H-1B visa applications and salary kickbacks to exploit foreign workers unlawfully.
(PENNSYLVANIA) — A federal jury convicted Bhaskar Savani and Arun Savani, brothers who operated through the Savani Group, of a racketeering conspiracy that prosecutors said combined Pennsylvania Medicaid fraud with false H-1B visa applications used to employ foreign workers unlawfully.
The U.S. Department of Justice announced the verdicts against the brothers and said the case centered on a decades-long scheme that defrauded Pennsylvania Medicaid of over $32 million.
Prosecutors tied the racketeering case to what the Justice Department described as a mix of healthcare billing fraud and employment-related immigration filings, along with a range of financial and obstruction offenses.
The Justice Department said the Savani brothers and Ola Radomiak, described as a long-term executive at the Savani Group, took part in schemes that included filing false H-1B visa applications, soliciting salary kickbacks from workers, and billing Medicaid through nominee-owned dental practices after their contracts ended.
Authorities also said the conduct included obstructing a grand jury investigation, money laundering, wire fraud, and mail fraud.
The convictions matter beyond the defendants because they connect two enforcement priorities that often run on separate tracks: protection of public healthcare funds and compliance in employment-based immigration filings, including H-1B visa applications.
In its announcement, the Justice Department described the activity as spanning over a decade and said the brothers enriched themselves substantially through claims that used non-treating dentists’ names.
A related Law360 report identified additional convicted co-conspirators as Niranjan Savani, described as a co-owner, Sunil Philip, described as an accountant, and Bharatkumar, described as a chemist.
That report said the additional defendants were convicted on racketeering conspiracy and healthcare fraud charges tied to the dental practice fraud.
Racketeering conspiracy cases typically require prosecutors to prove a pattern of criminal activity linked to an enterprise, and the government described the Savani Group’s operations as the vehicle for the alleged conduct.
The government’s theory, as outlined in the Justice Department announcement, focused on how billing practices and corporate control allegedly worked together to generate improper payments from Pennsylvania Medicaid.
Prosecutors said Medicaid billing continued through nominee-owned dental practices even after contracts ended, allowing claims to keep flowing while obscuring who ultimately benefited.
The nominee ownership structure, prosecutors said, helped hide control and financial gain, while claims were submitted under dentists’ names even when those dentists did not provide the treatment cited in the billing.
Authorities said the case also involved the movement of funds in ways that supported charges that included money laundering, alongside wire fraud and mail fraud counts tied to how claims and related communications moved through the system.
Obstruction-related conduct, prosecutors said, included efforts to interfere with a grand jury investigation, a central point for prosecutors in describing how the alleged enterprise protected itself when scrutiny increased.
The immigration angle, the Justice Department said, involved false H-1B visa applications connected to unlawful employment of foreign workers and to a kickback scheme in which workers were pressured to return part of their pay.
Those allegations focus on false petitions and representations tied to H-1B visa applications, rather than any government description of counterfeit visa documents being issued by the defendants.
In criminal cases, false H-1B filings often center on what an employer represents about a job, wages, and work arrangements, and the Justice Department framed the Savani case in those terms by describing false applications used to employ foreign workers unlawfully.
Misrepresentations in employment-based immigration filings can carry consequences that extend beyond criminal exposure for employers, with potential immigration consequences for workers depending on individual circumstances, including denials of immigration benefits and questions about removability.
The Justice Department did not frame the case as an immigration policy shift or a change to H-1B adjudications, but as a prosecution that used immigration-related conduct as part of the racketeering pattern.
Acting Deputy Inspector General Scott J. Lampert of HHS-OIG linked the verdict to Medicaid program integrity and deterrence.
“Today’s verdict sends a clear message: those who corrupt the Medicaid program for personal gain — no matter how elaborate their schemes — will be held fully accountable,” Lampert said.
Special Agent in Charge Jenifer L. Piovesan of IRS-CI Newark described a case that investigators said combined alleged healthcare fraud with financial crimes that relied on layers of entities and accounts.
“The defendants orchestrated a years‑long scheme to defraud Medicaid, evade taxes, and launder millions of dollars through a complex network of companies and accounts,” Piovesan said.
The Justice Department announcement positioned the case as a multi-agency investigation and prosecution, with the messaging from HHS-OIG and IRS-CI reflecting a focus on both the alleged theft of public healthcare dollars and the financial pathways used to move and conceal proceeds.
Investigators portrayed the scheme as elaborate, and the agencies’ statements emphasized that complexity would not prevent prosecutions tied to corruption of Pennsylvania Medicaid.
The case unfolded against a broader financial backdrop that outside analysts have pointed to in tracking the scale and growth of state payments connected to the Medicaid program.
OpenTheBooks.com analysis described in the material said state agency payments surged from $5.5 million to nearly $600 million over seven years, and it identified a specific $583 million figure in that period.
That analysis was attributed to Rachel O’Brien, deputy policy editor, and it was described as part of a wider look at government payments as national probes examined alleged misuse of public funds.
The Savani convictions also sit within a broader set of Pennsylvania prosecutions in which immigration fraud takes very different forms, with the Savani case centered on employment-related filings linked to alleged healthcare fraud.
One other Pennsylvania reference involved a Philadelphia man’s fraudulent U Visa submissions during 2017-2018, described as involving an unnamed defendant charged with six counts each of immigration document fraud and aggravated identity theft.
Another case cited in the material involved Mahmoud Almasry, also known as Mohammad Jiham, in a 2016 identity theft matter connected to U.S. entry.
That case was described as resulting in an indictment on February 27, 2026, announced by U.S. Attorney Troy Rivetti in the Western District of Pennsylvania.
The comparisons underline that “immigration fraud” can mean different alleged conduct across cases, from identity theft and document fraud connected to U Visa claims to false H-1B visa applications tied to employment arrangements.
In the Savani case, prosecutors blended the alleged immigration filing fraud with a healthcare billing fraud narrative to support a racketeering conspiracy theory that they said ran for years.
The Justice Department said the brothers operated through the Savani Group and used nominee-owned dental practices to continue billing after contracts ended, a point prosecutors treated as central to the mechanics of the alleged Medicaid fraud.
Authorities said the billing relied on dentists’ names appearing on claims even when those dentists did not treat the patients, a practice prosecutors said helped generate improper payments that enriched the brothers.
Federal investigators also tied the alleged operation to tax and money movement behavior, with IRS-CI highlighting alleged tax evasion and money laundering as part of what it called a complex network of companies and accounts.
The Law360 report’s identification of additional defendants broadened the picture of the alleged enterprise, describing roles that ranged from co-owner to accountant to chemist, and linking them to the racketeering conspiracy and healthcare fraud charges tied to the dental practice fraud.
The Justice Department announcement did not provide sentencing details, and it did not specify the exact trial date in the information described in the material.
Post-verdict proceedings in federal criminal cases typically move to sentencing hearings, and defendants can also challenge convictions through appeals, though the timing and scope of any next steps were not laid out in the announcements.
Lampert’s statement framed the verdict as an accountability marker for public programs, and investigators signaled they would keep focusing on complex schemes that target Pennsylvania Medicaid: “those who corrupt the Medicaid program for personal gain — no matter how elaborate their schemes — will be held fully accountable.”
