BY VEENA RAO
Memphis, TN, November 15, 2025: The case against Memphis gynecologic oncologist Dr. Sanjeev Kumar has taken a sharp turn in recent weeks, after a federal judge dismissed the most inflammatory counts — including the much-publicized Travel Act allegations — and threw out a series of broad FDA charges that prosecutors had built around thousands of procedures. What remains from the original indictment are a set of specific FDA counts tied to medical devices seized on a single day and a group of health-care fraud counts that now form the backbone of the government’s case, according to the defense.
Even as the earlier allegations were narrowed, prosecutors have returned with a new 46-count indictment, filed November 3, that focuses on the alleged adulteration and misbranding of single-use medical devices and on billing practices connected to their use. Dr. Kumar has denied all wrongdoing.
The newly filed charges come on the heels of an October 17 ruling in which Chief U.S. District Judge Sheryl H. Lipman dismissed 17 of 36 counts in the earlier superseding indictment. The judge threw out the Travel Act counts, saying the indictment did not allege conduct that met the statute’s definition of “sexual activity,” and struck several FDA-related counts for improperly combining what appeared to be thousands of patient encounters into single charges.
The ruling significantly reshaped the case and removed many of the allegations that originally captured national attention. What remains from the original indictment are a small number of FDA counts tied to specific devices seized on April 16, 2024, along with several health-care fraud counts that prosecutors say reflect improper billing to Medicare and Medicaid.
In a detailed analysis posted by Chapman Law Group, Dr. Kumar’s attorneys said the ruling confirms that the government’s early public narrative exceeded what the law allows. The firm wrote that “the most inflammatory counts in the government’s case… have now mostly been dismissed,” emphasizing that the surviving allegations are “discrete, testable events — not headline fodder.”
The defense has also criticized the tone of the government’s early messaging. Attorney Ronald W. Chapman II wrote, “On March 10, 2025, Dr. Kumar’s defense team put it in writing: the case had been ‘sensationalized,’ transforming alleged sterilization/billing disputes into a sex-trafficking narrative designed to inflame a vulnerable patient population.”
Chapman also pointed to the judge’s findings on the dismissed counts, noting that prosecutors “tried to roll thousands of patient procedures into single counts,” which he said risked non-unanimous verdicts because different jurors might convict for different underlying acts. He further noted that the Department of Justice removed portions of its initial February 28 press release, arguing that early public descriptions of the case “outran the law.”
Despite the dismissed charges, prosecutors maintain that Dr. Kumar engaged in unsafe medical practices and defrauded federal health programs. They argue that the alleged reuse of single-use devices and unnecessary procedures placed patients at risk and resulted in improper claims to Medicare and Medicaid.
The newly filed indictment appears to reflect an effort to restructure the case in line with the court’s earlier guidance, breaking allegations into narrower, more detailed counts.
Dr. Kumar remains presumed innocent, and both the remaining original counts and the newly filed charges will proceed through the federal court system. The contrast between the early public narrative and the legally narrowed case has become a central feature of the proceedings, leaving open questions about how much of the government’s case will ultimately reach a jury.
Image credit: Action News/Memphis.
