Real Estate Expert’s Generalized Observations Excluded

Mohammed Zafaranchi is charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, and destruction of records in a federal investigation.

The indictment alleged that Zafaranchi operated a series of call centers that defrauded homeowners by charging them for mortgage modification services that were not as represented.

Seeking a new trial, Defendant contended that the Court erroneously excluded testimony from his expert witness, Jack Cohen.

Real Estate Expert Witness

Jack G. Cohen is a private money real estate lender, real estate developer, investment property manager, and is well-experienced in real estate mortgages and finance, and purchase and sales transactions. He is also employed as a San Fernando Realty Real estate investment director (California Bureau of Real Estate).

Want to know more about the challenges Jack Cohen has faced? Get the full details with our Challenge Study report.

Discussion by the Court

Defendant sought to have Cohen opine on the Everett call center’s compliance with mortgage modification and marketing industry norms and standards, in rebuttal to the Government’s anticipated expert regarding the same.

Nevertheless, the Court barred Cohen’s testimony because he lacked the requisite specialized knowledge to opine on such issues.

Specifically, according to Cohen’s curriculum vitae, he has no specialized mortgage modification training, experience, or knowledge. Furthermore, his report contained only generalized representations of industry norms supported solely by his personal observations. Thus, it lacked a discussion of or reference to objective sources, such as the regulatory authorities governing the Everett call center. 

Moreover, Cohen’s CV and report also failed to demonstrate his specialized knowledge or experience in advertising and marketing techniques more generally.

Defendant next suggested, irrespective of the exclusion of Cohen’s testimony, that in accordance with Federal Rules of Evidence 403 and 704 (the latter being implied), the Court should have excluded Randall Lowell‘s testimony.

Lowell is a licensed real estate broker and mortgage broker, and has many years in the mortgage modification field. He has a mortgage loan underwriting certification and a U.S. Department Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) housing counselor certification.

Basically Lowell is an undisputed industry expert. And during trial, he testified at length regarding the industry standards, regulatory framework, and guidance governing and informing mortgage modifications and related services. The Court concluded that this was admissible because it would assist the jury in determining whether Defendant, vis à-vis the Everett call center, solicited modification services to the public with the intent to “devise a scheme or plan to defraud, or a scheme or plan for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

Held

The Court committed no error in barring Jack Cohen’s testimony.

Key Takeaway:

Cohen has no mortgage-specific educational certifications or mortgage modification knowledge or experience. In sum, Cohen’s knowledge, background, experience, and training fall well short of what Rule 702(a) requires.

Case Details:

Case Caption:	USA V. Zafaranchi
Docket Number:	2:22cr122
Court Name:	United States District Court, Washington Western
Order Date:	October 20, 2025