Fraud statute criminalizes the use of any wire, radio, or television communication in interstate of foreign commerce for the purpose of executing any scheme or artifice to defraud or obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises. 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Additionally, the term “scheme or artifice to defraud” includes any scheme or artifice to deprive another of the right of honest services. 18 U.S.C. § 1346. The right of honest services language of Section 1346 has been interpreted as criminalizing private commercial schemes that violate a fiduciary duty. See United States v. Welch, 327 F.3d 1081, 1109 (10th Cir.2003); United States v. Szur, 289 F.3d 200, 209 n. 3-5 (2nd Cir.2002); United States v. Rybicki,. 287 F.3d 257, 264 (2nd Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). It .is apparent that the Wire Fraud statute,
holding that section 1346 criminalizes schemes in which a defendant breached or induced the breach of a duty owed by an employee or agent to his employer or principal that was enforceable by an action in tort holding that in the absence of a product malfunction a plaintiff cannot establish that a defendant breached any duty owed holding that an agent owes a fiduciary duty to his principal holding that defendant in  1983 action may not be sued solely for injury caused by his employee or agent holding the employer breached the duty owed to its employee by erroneously advising the employee he would continue to have coverage for 30 days following his termination of employment under the employers group policy