Citing insufficient evidence produced at trial, the judge who heard the bribery case of U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez, D-New Jersey, and Florida ophthalmologist Salomon Melgen has tossed out seven of the 18 counts and has removed himself from the case.

U.S. District Judge William Walls granted motions for acquittal on charges that link contributions from Melgen totaling $660,000 to advocacy by Menendez with executive-branch officials in connection with Melgen's port security business and a Medicare billing dispute. The motions, filed under Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, claimed that evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction.

Walls said that the government “failed to prove an explicit quid pro quo regarding the political contribution counts.”

The ruling leaves a lighter agenda when the case is retried, with 11 counts remaining. The defendants still must defend themselves on counts related to Menendez's visa-related advocacy for women friends of Melgen, his advocacy for the Medicare billing dispute, his advocacy related to Melgen's contract to provide port security in the Dominican Republic, and his opposition to a gift of port security equipment to the Dominican Republic from the U.S. government.

In each of these areas, “there is evidence to sustain the determination that Menendez sought to 'exert pressure on' or 'advise' other government officials to take official actions for Melgen's benefit,” Walls said.

Among the counts Walls declined to dismiss are Count 2, violation of the Travel Act, for his acceptance and use of a luxury Paris hotel room, and Count 18, making false statements, for his failure to list gifts from Melgen on his financial disclosure reports.

Citing evidence of Menendez's visits to the Paris hotel, rides on Melgen's private jets and visits to his villa in the Dominican Republic, Walls said “a rational juror could conclude from the activities of these defendants that there was an implicit agreement to exchange things of value for official acts.”

Prosecutors claimed Menendez used the power of his office to advocate before federal officials on behalf of Melgen's personal and business matters in exchange for campaign contributions, air travel and luxury accommodations. Defense lawyers discounted the notion that Menendez accepted bribes from Melgen by citing the two men's long-running friendship.

The Department of Justice announced on Jan. 19 that it would retry the case and hoped for a trial date in the near future, but no date has been set. The first trial ended in a hung jury in November 2017 after two months of trial, with some jurors claiming the panel favored acquittal by a margin of 10-2.

Walls, who presided over the first trial, notified the parties in a letter dated Monday that he would not handle the next trial. He made the announcement in a letter that was not uploaded to the PACER system.

“Enclosed is my determination of the pending Rule 29 motion. With that submission, I now recuse myself from any further supervision and participation in this cause. Best of luck,” Walls said.

Menendez's attorney, Abbe Lowell, and Kirk Orgrosky, the lawyer for Melgen, said the judge's partial dismissal ruling calls into question the government's decision to retry the case.

“With the court's decision, this case is now solely about the purest of personal hospitality allegations—stays at his friend, Dr. Melgen's family home and reimbursed trips on a plane that Dr. Melgen was flying anyway,” said Lowell, of Norton Rose Fulbright in Washington. “A jury rejected the government's facts and theory of bribery, and now the trial judge has rejected a critical legal theory on which the case was brought. The decision of the DOJ to retry the case makes even less sense than it did last week and we hope it would be reconsidered.”

“The Court's acquittal on all counts which involve monetary contributions is long overdue,” said Orgrosky, of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer in Washington. “There was simply never any quid pro quo agreement between my client and Sen. Menendez and the Court has now recognized this fact by acquitting these two long-time Hispanic-American friends on all counts that involved political contributions. Hopefully, this Department of Justice will read the Court's decision and drop the remainder of the case,” Orgrosky said.

 A spokeswoman for the DOJ, Nicole Navas Oxman, said her agency “is reviewing the Court's order and considering next steps.”