RE-REPORTED BY
youarewithinthenorms.com
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC., SPIRIT OF REV. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS, MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., M.B.A., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MD LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
This judicial order from the U.S. District Court in Tennessee addresses motions filed by the defendant, Sanjeev Kumar, who faces a 36-count superseding indictment related to his women’s health practice. The most important rulings are the granting of Kumar’s motions to dismiss several counts, the denial of his challenges to others, and the denial of his attempt to strike a felony enhancement.
THE KUMAR CASE
A Federal Judge Reined in an Overbroad Indictment Against Dr. Kumar
According to Atty Ronald W. Chapman;
A federal judge dismissed the most inflammatory counts in the government’s case against my client, Dr. Sanjeev Kumar—including the highly-publicized travel act charges—and threw out a stack of over-aggregated remains are specific FDA counts related to devices seized on a single day and a group of health-care fraud counts that we will continue to contest. Kumar Order Granting FDA counts. What remains is a set of specific FDA counts tied to devices seized on a single day and a group of healthcare fraud counts that we will continue to fight.
In February 2025, one of the last actions of United States Attorney Reagan Foundren was to unleash a flurry of charges against a well-respected Memphis doctor that have now mostly been dismissed by a Memphis Federal Judge. The problem with her theory is that it was largely legally insufficient.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNTS 1–9, 12–13,16–18, 21–22, 25 AND DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR NARROW COUNTS 10–11, 14–15, 19–20, 23–24, 26–36 OR TO STRIKE FELONY ENHANCEMENT
This legal document is a United States District Court Order addressing motions filed by the defendant, Sanjeev Kumar, in a criminal case regarding a thirty-six-count superseding indictment.
The court granted Kumar’s first motion to dismiss, resulting in the dismissal of Counts 1–4, which charged illegal sex acts related to enticement and inducement to travel, because the alleged conduct lacked the necessary element of sexual gratification under the Travel Act.
The court also granted Kumar’s second motion, dismissing Counts 5–9, 12–13, 16–18, 21–22, and 25 for being duplicitous, as they charged thousands of separate acts of medical device adulteration and misbranding over several years in single counts.
Finally, the court denied the third motion, which sought to dismiss remaining counts on grounds of constitutional vagueness or to strike a felony enhancement, finding the remaining charges related to healthcare fraud and certain adulteration/misbranding acts to be sufficiently clear and properly pled.
The Ruling in Plain English
Prosecutors charged Dr. Kumar under a federal “Travel Act” theory that accused him of enticing patients to travel for “illegal sexual activity.” The Court held that “sexual activity” in this context means conduct done for sexual gratification—and the indictment didn’t even allege that. In the Court’s words, prosecutors cannot “stretch the law to fit the evil.”
Result:
Counts 1–4 dismissed.
The government faild to specifically allege a date. The Court said that’s not allowed. On multiple FDA counts, prosecutors tried to roll thousands of patient procedures—into single counts. That’s called duplicity, and it risks a non‑unanimous verdict because different jurors might convict for different underlying acts.
Result: Counts 5–9, 12–13, 16–18, 21–22, and 25 dismissed as duplicitous.
ABOUT ATTY. RONALD W. CHAPMAN ll
Attorney Ronald W. Chapman’s unique approach to persuasion is based on his deep understanding of human behavior and his ability to combine timeless principles of logic and rhetoric with innovative communication techniques.
His expertise helps individuals craft messages that not only resonate but also create genuine connections in a world overwhelmed by information. Drawing from his courtroom victories, scholarly background, military service with the United States Marine Corps, and passion for effective communication, Chapman provides readers with the tools to make their ideas stick in a meaningful and impactful way.
Whether in the courtroom or through his writing, Chapman is committed to helping others navigate the complexities of modern persuasion with authenticity and skill.
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
THE NORMS
REFERENCES
By Anonymous
October 20, 2025
For decades, lawyers, judges, and policy critics have whispered a quiet truth about the American drug war: the math has never added up. Beneath the solemn formality of federal sentencing lies a machinery of arithmetic—drug weights, offense levels, and conversion tables—that determines human freedom with all the warmth of a spreadsheet. Now, for the first time, a group of researchers has built a machine to check the system’s own math, and what it found calls into question the numerical foundations of mass incarceration itself.
A small team of law students and data scientists at a major law university spent two years training artificial intelligence models to read and analyze thousands of federal Presentence Investigation Reports—those dense, quasi-forensic documents that dictate sentencing outcomes in every criminal case. What their AI uncovered was not a few scattered mistakes but a systemic pattern of mathematical distortion: drug quantity calculations that were inconsistent, unsupported, or, in some cases, arithmetically impossible.
These findings, drawn from over twelve thousand anonymized cases spanning nearly a decade, suggest that the numerical backbone of the federal sentencing system may be riddled with error. In plain terms, the AI confirmed what defense attorneys have long suspected—that defendants are routinely sentenced under quantities of drugs that no laboratory ever weighed and no jury ever confirmed.
Who is Dr Kumar and when did this happen?