Dubin v. United States

Background

David Dubin helped manage a psychological services company and was convicted for overbilling Medicaid for psychological testing. The company submitted claims that overstated the tester’s qualifications and altered the examination date. Dubin was charged with healthcare fraud under 18 U.S.C. §1347 and with aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. §1028A(a)(1) because his billing included the patient’s Medicaid reimbursement number. The District Court questioned whether the identity‑theft charge fit but felt bound by Fifth Circuit precedent; an en banc Fifth Circuit affirmed.

Reasoning

The Court examined whether a defendant “uses” another person’s identifying information “in relation to” a predicate offense. The Justices found those terms context dependent and relied on the statute’s title, the trio of verbs “transfers, possesses, or uses,” and the list of predicate crimes. The Court concluded §1028A(a)(1) applies only when the use of the identifying information has a genuine nexus to the fraud—when the identification itself is at the crux of the crime—rather than when a name or number is merely part of routine billing. Because the patient’s identifying number was ancillary to Dubin’s overbilling, the identity‑theft enhancement did not apply.

Real world impact

The decision narrows when prosecutors may add §1028A’s mandatory two‑year enhancement. It reduces the risk that ordinary billing methods or minor overcharges will trigger aggravated identity theft charges. Many pending and future prosecutions that relied on a broad reading of §1028A must be reexamined by lower courts. The Court vacated the Fifth Circuit’s judgment and remanded for further proceedings.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Gorsuch concurred in the judgment but warned that §1028A(a)(1) may be unconstitutionally vague and urged Congress to clarify the law.