Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Full Docket Denton Sdfl Factual Proffer Statement as to Cindi Ellis Denton — USA v. Denton (Dkt. 34, S.D. Fla.)

Court filing

Factual Proffer Statement as to Cindi Ellis Denton — USA v. Denton (Dkt. 34, S.D. Fla.)

Filed July 22, 2021 in USA v. Denton; one of 9 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Filed2021-07-22

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 0:21-cr-60171-RS · Doc. 34 · 2021-07-22 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/22/2021

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 21-cr-60171-SMITH/VALLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
CINDI ELLIS DENTON,

Defendant.
/

FACTUAL PROFFER

The United States and Defendant Cindi Ellis Denton (“Defendant”) agree that had this
case proceeded to trial, the United States of America would have proven, beyond a reasonable
doubt, the following facts, among others, pertaining to violations of Title 18, United States Code,
Sections 371 and 1343, which occurred in the Southern District of Florida and elsewhere.

From in around June 2020, through in or around at least September 2020, Defendant
knowingly and willfully conspired and agreed with Individual 1, Individual 2, and others to
submit and cause the submission of a fraudulent Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loan
application. PPP loans are forgivable business loans for small businesses, created as part of the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act, the general purpose of which
was to help businesses pay their expenses during the COVID-19 Pandemic and to encourage
them to retain their employees. Generally, a business could seek a PPP loan in the amount of 2.5
times its average monthly payroll.

A PPP loan application was processed by a participating lender. If a PPP loan application
was approved, the participating lender funded the PPP Joan using its own monies. While it was

the participating lender that issued the PPP loan, the loan was 100% guaranteed by the Small

Page 1 of 4
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/22/2021 Page 2 of 4

Business Administration (“SBA”). Data from the application, including information about the
borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of employees, was transmitted by
the lender to the SBA in the course of processing the loan.

PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain permissible
expenses—payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The PPP allowed the interest
and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on
these expense items within a designated period of time and used a defined portion of the PPP
loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

In furtherance of the conspiracy, and to accomplish its object and purpose, Defendant
caused the submission of a PPP loan application on behalf of her company, Emerald Jade
Solutions, Inc. (“Emerald Jade”), that Defendant knew contained materially false and fraudulent
representations. Specifically, on or about June 2, 2020, Individual 2, in coordination with
Defendant and at Defendant’s request, electronically submitted to Bank 1, through Bank
Processor 1, a PPP loan application package on behalf of Emerald Jade seeking a loan in the
amount of $491,310 (the “Emerald Jade Loan”). The loan application documents falsely claimed
that Emerald Jade had 24 employees and an average monthly payroll of $589,574.04. And the
supporting documents, which included a purported company bank statement and IRS Forms 941
for 2019 (Employer’s Quarterly Federal Tax Return) signed with the name “Cindi Denton,” were
forgeries. IRS records showed that Emerald Jade did not file any Forms 941 in 2019.

As a result of the knowing and willful false and fraudulent representations made by
Defendant and his co-conspirators in the loan documents, Bank Processor | approved the
Emerald Jade Loan, which Bank 1 funded by making an electronic wire transfer in the amount of

$491,310 to the Emerald Jade bank account on June 3, 2020. The following day, on June 4,
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/22/2021 Page 3 of 4

-

2020, Defendant wired $98,262.00 to Individual 2 as a kickback for preparing the fraudulent PPP
loan application. The Defendant also sent a $150,000 wire to a business checking account using
funds she had received from the Emerald Jade Loan.

The parties agree that the fraud scheme in this case involved the use of interstate wires,

including those required to submit the fraudulent Emerald Jade PPP loan application.

[THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Case 0:21-cr-60171-RS Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/22/2021 Page 4 of 4

The information contained in this proffer is not a complete recitation of the facts and

circumstances of this case, but the parties agree it is sufficient to prove the Information beyond a

reasonable doubt.

Date: fi le | By:

Date: z By:

Dateror 227 f\ By:

JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ
ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

LINDSEY L OULOS FRIEDMAN
ASSISTANT ED STATES ATTORNEY
DANIEL KAHN

ACTING CHIEF, FRAUD SECTION

K bn

PHILP B. TROUT
TRIAL ATTORNEY

Hf.

ave GONZALEZ
ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT

ce
CINDI ELLIS DENTON
DEFENDANT

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.flsd.594906.34.0.pdf
Size
201,055 bytes
SHA-256
835ec65e1666a8724122216dfa2597f7422fe2f099f6bea28d12cd7d44d3c5f5
Our copy
gov.uscourts.flsd.594906.34.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top