Hospice Los Angeles County: Key figures named in fraud probe
Federal prosecutors have named a small group of defendants in recent Los Angeles County hospice fraud cases, and those names now anchor the public record. The cases center on billing Medicare and Medi-Cal for services that were never provided or never medically justified. Readers tracking Hospice Los Angeles County cases want the specifics on who was charged and what each person is accused of doing.
April federal operation
The Department of Justice announced arrests on April 2, 2026, as part of a coordinated takedown in the Central District of California. Eight people were taken into custody that day, with charges filed against fifteen individuals in total. The schemes allegedly produced more than fifty million dollars in intended losses to Medicare.
Prosecutors described sham hospices that submitted claims for patients who were not terminally ill or who were already deceased. Several of the facilities operated inside Los Angeles County limits, giving the case direct relevance to Hospice Los Angeles County searches. The complaints list specific addresses, billing totals, and the roles each defendant is said to have played.
Local coverage noted that the arrests followed months of investigative work by the FBI and the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. The timing overlapped with a separate state action announced days later by California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
State level scale
California’s Attorney General filed charges on April 9, 2026, against twenty-one suspects tied to a Medi-Cal fraud ring valued at two hundred sixty-seven million dollars. Five arrests were reported in connection with that filing. Public materials did not release individual names, keeping attention on the federal docket for identifiable defendants.
The state case focused on facilities that billed for hospice services without providing them. Investigators described a network that stretched across Los Angeles County and used shell companies to cycle claims. The dollar figure dwarfed the federal Medicare cases announced the same week.
Because the state action named no individuals in its press materials, reporters and readers turned to the federal complaints for concrete names tied to Hospice Los Angeles County operations.
Lolita Beronilla Minerd
Lolita Beronilla Minerd, also known as Lolita Beronilla Rice, was arrested at age sixty-five and charged with health care fraud. She is listed as a resident of Anaheim and worked as a licensed vocational nurse. Prosecutors placed her inside the same April federal operation that targeted multiple hospice billing schemes.
Her role is described in the complaint as assisting with patient intake and documentation at one of the targeted facilities. The charges do not allege she owned or directed the hospice, but they do tie her to claims submitted for ineligible beneficiaries. The case remains in early proceedings.
Minerd’s arrest illustrates how the investigation reached staff-level participants, not only owners. Court records show she was taken into custody alongside several other defendants during the coordinated April sweep.
Gladwin and Amelou Gill
Gladwin Gill, sixty-six, and Amelou Gill, seventy, both of Covina, were arrested at their home by an FBI SWAT team. They are accused of operating St. Francis Palliative Care, a Glendale hospice that submitted more than five point two million dollars in claims. Medicare paid out more than four million dollars before the scheme was stopped.
Gladwin Gill is identified in court papers as a psychologist, while Amelou Gill is listed as a registered nurse. Prosecutors allege the couple directed staff to enroll patients who did not meet hospice eligibility criteria. The Gills’ case has drawn local attention because their facility operated inside Los Angeles County.
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli highlighted the billing totals during a press briefing, noting the direct financial impact on the Medicare trust fund. The couple is scheduled for arraignment in the coming weeks.
Palma and Catbagan repeat involvement
Nita Almuete Paddit Palma, seventy-six, was already serving a nine-year sentence for a separate one hundred six million dollar hospice fraud when new charges were filed. Prosecutors allege she continued to direct operations from custody through her husband, Adolfo Cezar Catbagan. The new indictment names three additional hospice facilities tied to the couple.
Catbagan, sixty-eight, of Glendale, faces an eleven-count indictment that includes conspiracy and health care fraud counts. Court documents describe him as the point person for patient recruitment and claim submission while Palma remained incarcerated in Seattle. The case shows how prior convictions did not end the alleged activity.
Because Palma’s earlier conviction was also connected to Los Angeles County hospices, her name surfaces repeatedly in searches for Hospice Los Angeles County enforcement actions. The current charges extend the timeline of alleged misconduct across multiple years.
Oren David Shachar and deceased patient billing
Oren David Shachar, fifty-nine, of Van Nuys, was charged in June 2026 as part of a larger national health care fraud sweep. Prosecutors say he owned or controlled four hospice companies that billed Medicare roughly twenty-seven million dollars using the identities of deceased or non-terminal patients.
The companies named in the complaint include Gentle Touch Hospice Care in Valley Glen, Oxford Hospice Care in Montclair, Art of Hospice in Encino, and Holly Trinity Hospice in Glendale. Investigators allege Shachar purchased patient data from marketers and paid kickbacks to secure referrals. The scheme allegedly ran for more than two years before charges were filed.
Shachar’s case stands apart from the April arrests because it centers on the use of deceased patient identities rather than living but ineligible beneficiaries. The location of his companies keeps the matter squarely inside Los Angeles County.
Common threads across cases
Every named defendant worked inside or owned facilities that submitted claims to federal Medicare or state Medi-Cal programs. The complaints describe a pattern of enrolling patients who did not qualify, then billing monthly for routine visits that did not occur. Several facilities operated from rented offices with minimal clinical staff.
The Gill and Palma cases both involved married couples, showing how ownership and clinical roles sometimes stayed within families. Shachar’s operation relied on purchased patient lists, illustrating a different recruitment method. The variety of schemes indicates that enforcement actions are tracking multiple business models rather than a single template.
Local coverage has noted that the concentration of cases in Los Angeles County reflects both the size of the Medicare population and the number of licensed hospices in the region. Federal and state prosecutors have signaled continued scrutiny of the sector.
Next steps in the courts
Arraignments and detention hearings for the April defendants are scheduled through the summer. Shachar’s case, filed later, is still in the discovery phase. Probation officers have begun preparing pretrial reports that will influence release conditions for those not already in custody.
Defense attorneys have filed routine motions for discovery and have not yet indicated whether any defendants plan to challenge the charges at trial. Prosecutors have stated they will seek restitution for the amounts paid by Medicare and Medi-Cal. The timeline for any trials remains uncertain given the volume of evidence collected.
Observers expect additional indictments as investigators continue to review claims data from the remaining facilities named in the complaints. The current docket already supplies the clearest public list of individuals tied to recent Hospice Los Angeles County enforcement actions.
Forward impact
The named cases give concrete examples of how individual operators and staff members can be held accountable when hospice billing crosses into fraud. Future compliance reviews by Medicare contractors will likely reference these indictments when assessing risk in Los Angeles County. Patients and families searching for legitimate providers now have specific enforcement records to consult alongside licensing databases.
