July 29, 2008
This criminal RICO prosecution arises from a prescription-drug-based fraud scheme advanced in varying degrees by eight individual and two corporate defendants. Doc. # 1; # 106 at 2. A jury convicted Martin J. Bradley, Jr., Martin J. Bradley, III, Albert Tellechea and Bio-Med Plus, Inc. (Bio-Med). Doc. ## 738-41. The Court ultimately entered Orders directing forfeiture and, to that end, appointing a Receiver and Monitor to marshal the Bradley defendants' forfeited assets, which includes Bio-Med and its inventory. Doc. ## 598, 599, 790.
The Receiver has since marshaled various assets for liquidation, and successfully moved for leave to implement a third-party claims-resolution procedure. See U.S. v. Bradley, 2008 WL 228064 (S.D.Ga. 1/25/08) (unpublished); doc. #1108. Subsequently, this Court noted the claim filed by the Florida Department of Health (DOH), and directed the Receiver to report to this Court on the disposition of it, and explain why it could not be resolved within 10 days. Doc. # 1124.
Florida's DOH now moves this Court "for clarification," noting that it timely filed its $1.3 million claim, and that resulted "in a Settlement Agreement and General Release between DOH and the Receiver appointed by this Court. . . ." Doc. # 1154. The DOH concludes:
In view of the fact that a claim has been filed by DOH after settlement with the Receiver who has recommended approval of DOH's claim to this Court, DOH respectfully requests this Court to advise if any further action is required by DOH to expedite approval by the Court for the claim.Id.
In other words, the DOH wants its money. The Court discerns no motion seeking its approval of any payment to the DOH. Nor is it notified of any payment impediment. Accordingly, the DOH's "clarification" motion (doc. # 1154) is GRANTED : The Receiver shall promptly reply and show the Court why it should not approve payment to the DOH. If she cannot, then she must promptly submit a proposed Order approved by the DOH.