Plea Agreement as to Fatiu Ismaila Lawal (cc: Uspo, Flu, Afu) — United States v. Lawal (Dkt. 60, W.D. Wash. No. 3:23-cr-05034)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington · No. 3:23-cr-05034-RJB · Doc. 60 · 2024-09-12 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Nn oO FP W LV

~

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 1 of 19

FILED LODGED

RECEIVED

SEP 1 2 2024

CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
BY DEPUTY

The Honorable Robert J. Bryan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
Vv.
a
FATIU ISMAILA LAWAL,
Defendant.

NO. CR23-5034-01 RJB

PLEA AGREEMENT

The United States, through United States Attorney Tessa M. Gorman and Assistant

United States Attorney Cindy Chang of the Western District of Washington, and Defendant

Fatiu Ismaila Lawal and Defendant’s attorney Paula T. Olson enter into the following Plea

Agreement, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(1)(B).

1. «The Charges. Defendant, having been advised ‘of the right to have this

matter tried before a jury, agrees to waive that right and enters a plea of guilty to each of

the following charges contained in the Indictment:

a. Wire Fraud, as charged in Count 3, in violation of Title 18, United

States Code, Section 1343; and

Plea Agreement - |
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
So CO YN HR WA BP WH HPO eH

BO bw NHN KH KH KN BD Dm eH ep
SY DN OD FSF WD NO KF DTD OO Oo HYD HDB OH FR W YY KF OC

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 2 of 19

b. Aggravated Identity Theft, as charged in Count 16, in violation of

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1028A.

By entering pleas of guilty, Defendant hereby waives all objections to the form of
the charging document. Defendant further understands that before entering any guilty plea,
Defendant will be placed under oath. Any statement given by Defendant under oath may
be used by the United States in a prosecution for perjury or false statement.

2. Elements of the Offenses. The elements of the offenses to which Defendant
is pleading guilty are as follows:

a. The elements of Wire Fraud, as charged in Count 3, in violation of

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343, are as follow:

First, the defendant knowingly participated in, or devised, a scheme or plan
for obtaining money or property through false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or
promises;

Second, the promises, statements, or representations were material, that is,
they had a natural tendency to influence a person to part with money or property;

Third, the defendant acted with the intent to defraud;

Fourth, the defendant used, or caused to be used, the wires in interstate or
foreign commerce to carry out or attempt to carry out an essential part of the scheme; and

Fifth, the violation occurred in relation to, or involved, benefit payments

authorized, transmitted, disbursed or paid in connection with a presidentially-declared
major disaster or emergency.

b. The elements of Aggravated Identity Theft, as charged in Count 16,

in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1028A, are as follow:

First, the defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used, without
legal authority, a means of identification of another person;

Second, the defendant knew the means of identification belonged to a real

person; and
Plea Agreement - 2 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101

(206) 553-7970
Oo CO ~ITI DW om BP WH LPO =|

Oo wpo NO NO NHN WH WN NO He He He Re Re Re Re ee RR
On © 7 i a © > On OE oS © oe i © > ©) O° ns © Sn or)

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 3 of 19

Third, the defendant did so during and in relation to the crime of wire fraud.
3. The Penalties. Defendant understands that the statutory penalties applicable

to the offense(s) to which Defendant is pleading guilty are as follows:

a. For the offense of wire fraud, as charged in Count 3: A term of
imprisonment of up to 30 years, a fine of up to $1,000,000, a period of supervision
following release from prison of up to five years, and a mandatory special
assessment of 100 dollars. Ifa probationary sentence is imposed, the probationary
period can be for up to five years.

b. For the offense of aggravated identity theft, as charged in Count 16:
A mandatory term of imprisonment of two years, which must be consecutive to any
other sentence, a fine of up to $250,000, a period of supervision following release
from prison of up to one year, and a mandatory special assessment of 100 dollars.
Defendant understands that supervised release is a period of time following

imprisonment during which Defendant will be subject to certain restrictive conditions and
requirements. Defendant further understands that, if supervised release is imposed and
Defendant violates one or more of the conditions or requirements, Defendant could be
returned to prison for all or part of the term of supervised release that was originally
imposed. This could result in Defendant serving a total term of imprisonment greater than
the statutory maximum stated above.

Defendant understands that as a part of any sentence, in addition to any term of
imprisonment and/or fine that is imposed, the Court may order Defendant to pay restitution
to any victim of the offense, as required by law.

Defendant further understands that the consequences of pleading guilty may include
the forfeiture of certain property, either as a part of the sentence imposed by the Court, or
as a result of civil judicial or administrative process.

Defendant agrees that any monetary penalty the Court imposes, including the

special assessment, fine, costs; or restitution, is due and payable immediately and further

Plea Agreement - 3 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
So Oo NY DH NO BP WH HHO He

NO wp NO WV NY NY WN NO KF KF Fe RP HPF RRP OF OSE el
SS HD nA BP WW NYO KY ODO CO MO NAN DB A FP W PO KF CO

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 4 of 19

agrees to submit a completed Financial Disclosure Statement as requested by the United
States Attorney’s Office.

Defendant understands that, if pleading guilty to a felony drug offense, Defendant
will become ineligible for certain food stamp and Social Security benefits as directed by
Title 21, United States Code, Section 862a.

4. Immigration Consequences. Defendant recognizes that pleading guilty
may have consequences with respect to Defendant’s immigration status if Defendant is not
a citizen of the United States. Under federal law, a broad range of crimes are grounds for
removal, and some offenses make removal from the United States presumptively
mandatory. Removal and other immigration consequences are the subject of a separate
proceeding, and Defendant understands that no one, including Defendant’s attorney and
the Court, can predict with certainty the effect of a guilty plea on immigration status.
Defendant nevertheless affirms that Defendant wants to plead guilty regardless of any
immigration consequences that Defendant’s guilty pleas may entail, even if the
consequence is Defendant’s mandatory removal from the United States.

5. Rights Waived by Pleading Guilty. Defendant understands that by
pleading guilty, Defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives the following rights:

a. The right to plead not guilty and to persist in a plea of not guilty;

b. The right to a speedy and public trial before a jury of Defendant’s
peers;

c. The right to the effective assistance of counsel at trial, including, if
Defendant could not afford an attorney, the right to have the Court appoint one for
Defendant;

d. The right to be presumed innocent until guilt has been established

beyond a reasonable doubt at trial;

e. The right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against Defendant
at trial;
Plea Agreement - 4 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Oo CO SY HD WO Fe WD Pe

NM BO SO KN KH DO NO RO Rm RR Ree ee ee
oe > ; re Ss © ° Ss > Sr © io <n ©) ©. ~ no > s\n Se)

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 5 of 19

f. The right to compel or subpoena witnesses to appear on Defendant’s
behalf at trial;

g. The right to testify or to remain silent at trial, at which trial such
silence could not be used against Defendant; and

h. The right to appeal a finding of guilt or any pretrial rulings.

6. United States Sentencing Guidelines. Defendant understands and
acknowledges that the Court must consider the sentencing range calculated under the
United States Sentencing Guidelines and possible departures under the Sentencing
Guidelines together with the other factors set forth in Title 18, United States Code, Section
3553(a), including: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s); (2) the history and
characteristics of Defendant; (3) the need for the sentence to reflect the seriousness of the
offense(s), to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense(s);
(4) the need for the sentence to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (5) the need
for the sentence to protect the public from further crimes of Defendant; (6) the need to
provide Defendant with educational and vocational training, medical care, or other
correctional treatment in the most effective manner; (7) the kinds of sentences available;
(8) the need to provide restitution to victims; and (9) the need to avoid unwarranted
sentenze disparity among defendants involved in similar conduct who have similar records.
Accordingly, Defendant understands and acknowledges that:

a. The Court will determine Defendant’s Sentencing Guidelines range at
the time of sentencing;

b. After consideration of the Sentencing Guidelines and the factors in 18
U.S.C. 3553(a), the Court may impose any sentence authorized by law, up to the maximum
term authorized by law;

c. The Court is not bound by any recommendation regarding the

sentence to be imposed, or by any calculation or estimation of the Sentencing Guidelines

Plea Agreement - 5 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v, Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
So CO© SN DW NH BP WW HO &

MB PO NY PO KN DO YQ NO Re Re RR Re RPO HOO ReSlUcreE lL
SI HD WO SFP W NYO YK DB OBO fe NI DB Uo fF WW NHN KF BS

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 6 of 19

range offered by the parties or the United States Probation Department, or by any
stipulations or agreements between the parties in this Plea Agreement; and

d. Defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea solely because of the
sentence imposed by the Court.

7, Ultimate Sentence. Defendant acknowledges that no one has promised or
guaranteed what sentence the Court will impose.

8. Statement of Facts. Defendant admits Defendant is guilty of the charged
offenses. The parties agree on the following facts, and further agree that all of these facts
constitute relevant conduct under the United States Sentencing Guidelines:

a. Overview. Defendant Fatiu Lawal is a Nigerian national and
Canadian resident. Lawal was the operator of various email accounts, including the
accounts with the email addresses gamework393@gmail.com,
bankupdtes2014@gmail.com, limapasco@gmail.com, js755642@gmail.com, and
js755641@gmail.com. Lawal also operated the domain names and associated email
accounts for sensormargin.com, minderpower.com, redfoxdna.com, and unitedgsat.com.

b. Lawal and his co-conspirator, Nigerian national and Canadian
resident Sakiru Ambali, obtained the personal identifying information (PII), to include
names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers, of more than 14,700 unwitting
Americans. Lawal and Ambali obtained this stolen PII using unlawful means, including
through purchases facilitated on Telegram.

C. As discussed below, beginning at the onset of the COVID-19
pandemic, Lawal and -Ambali used this stolen PII to submit more than 1,700 claims for
COVID-19 pandemic unemployment benefits in over 25 states, to submit fraudulent
applications for small business assistance, and to submit over 2,300 fraudulent claims for
tax refunds. Lawal personally participated in the submission of over 3,791 fraudulent
claims seeking American government funds and caused government agencies to pay at

least $1,345,472, primarily from COVID-19 pandemic unemployment benefits.

Plea Agreement - 6 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
So CS ND OO FP W LO

pO wp bP BO PO KN BK DR eRe Re Re Ree ee ee
SI DN UN FBP WD NY K§ CT OBO Bw HDT Dn fF WD YP KF FS

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 7 of 19

d. Pandemic Unemployment Benefit Claims. On March 27, 2020, the
United States enacted into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(CARES) Act. The CARES Act authorized approximately $2 trillion in aid to American
workers, families, and businesses to mitigate the economic consequences of the COVID-
19 pandemic. The CARES Act funded and authorized each state to administer new
unemployment benefits. These benefits included: (1) Federal Pandemic Unemployment
Compensation, which provided a benefit of $600 per week per unemployed worker in
addition to existing benefits; (2) Pandemic Unemployment Assistance, which extended
benefits to self-employed persons, independent contractors, and others; and (3) Pandemic
Emergency Unemployment Assistance, which extended benefits for an additional 13
weeks after regular unemployment benefits were exhausted.

e. CARES Act unemployment benefits were funded by the United States
government through the Department of Labor and administered at the state level by state
agencies known as state workforce agencies (SWAs). The Washington Employment
Security Department (ESD) is the SWA for the State of Washington.

f. CARES Act unemployment benefits were authorized, transferred,
disbursed and paid in connection with a nationwide emergency declared by Presidential
Proclamation 9994 (effective as of March 1, 2020) and a Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Washington concerning the COVID-19 pandemic that was issued
on March 22, 2020. On August 8, 2020, to further assist American workers suffering from
the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the President authorized the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to expend up to $44 billion from disaster relief funds for
the Lost Wage Assistance Program (L.WAP) to provide an additional $300 per week. to
workers who were unemployed because of COVID-19.

g. SWAs allow applicants to apply online for state-administered
unemployment benefits. For example, in Washington, applicants can apply online for

ESD-administered benefits by visiting ESD’s Unemployment Tax and Benefit (UTAB)

Plea Agreement - 7 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Co Se SN HD A SP WW HO

NS po NO WN YH WN NY NO KF KF YF BF KP eS Orel TSU ll
SI Hn UW BP WwW NY KF DOD ODO eH NN DBD FP WD HY KK OD

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 8 of 19

system via an online portal called eServices. To access eServices, the applicant must first
set up an account with the state’s SecureAccess Washington (SAW) web-based identity
validation system.

h. Defendant’s Fraudulent Pandemic Unemployment Claims.
Beginning in or about March 2020, and continuing until at least December 2021, Lawal
accessed ESD’s UTAB and SAW websites, as well as the online application platforms for
other SWAs. Lawal then submitted at least 790 claims for pandemic unemployment
benefits using the stolen PII of at least 790 American workers. These fraudulent claims
caused SWAs to pay over $1.3 million in pandemic unemployment benefits, including
funds from LWAP. Lawal personally used the gamework393@gmail.com,
bankupdates2014@gmail.com, and other email accounts to activate the claims. To prevent
the SWAs from recognizing that a single email account was being used to submit multiple
claims, Lawal inserted periods at various places in the Gmail addresses. Lawal also used
hundreds of unique email addresses associated with sensormargin.com, a domain he
controlled.

i. As one example of this conduct, as charged in Count 3, on about May
7, 2020, Lawal activated a claim using the email address g.a.mewor.k.3.9.3@gmail.com,
which caused Washington State to send an email via interstate wire transfer from Olympia,
Washington, to a Google server outside Washington State. Similarly, as charged in Count
16, Lawal, without lawful authority, submitted a fraudulent claim using the PII, to include
name, Social Security number, and date of birth, of a person with the initials T.G., a
Washington resident whom Lawal knew to be a real person.

j. When completing the applications for pandemic unemployment
benefits, Lawal, Ambali, and their co-conspirators directed some of the benefits be paid to
online payment accounts, including accounts administered by MovoCash, Inc. Lawal,
Ambali, and their co-conspirators also directed fraudulent benefits to be loaded onto debit:

cards issued by banks and mailed to addresses in the United States or deposited into bank

Plea Agreement - 8 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RIB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
oOo Oo NSN BO OO BR WH Be

Mm Po Bb PD NYO HN LO NO RRR RO RR RR SE Sl le
SI DN WN B WO NO F& DT DO 6B NDT HDB NH FBP WD YNPO KF SO

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 9 of 19

accounts controlled by persons known as “money mules,” who withdrew and transferred
the funds according to instructions given by Lawal, Ambali, and their co-conspirators.
Lawal personally obtained a significant amount of proceeds from the fraud scheme
employing these fraudulent applications.

k. Fraudulent Economic Injury Disaster Loan Applications. The
CARES Act also authorized the Small Business Administration to provide forgivable loans
known as Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDLs) of up to $2 million to eligible small
businesses experiencing substantial financial disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Qualifying businesses applying for an EIDL must submit an application to the SBA and
provide information about its operations, such as the number of employees, gross revenues
for the 12-month period preceding the disaster, and cost of goods sold in the 12-month
period preceding the disaster. The applicant must also certify that all of the information in
the application is true and correct to the best of the applicant’s knowledge.

lL. Between about August 11, 2020 and October 6, 2021, Lawal and
Ambali submitted at least 38 fraudulent EIDL applications. The SBA denied all but one
application, which resulted a payment of $2,500.

m. Fraudulent Tax Refund Claims. Lawal also used American
taxpayers’ stolen PII to submit fraudulent claims for refunds from the Internal Revenue
Service without the taxpayers’ knowledge. Between 2018 and November 2022, Lawal,
using the gamework393@gmail.com, bankupdates2014@gmail.com,
js8979767@gmail.com, and other accounts including those from domain names
sensormargin.com, redfoxdna.com, minderpower.com, and unitedgsat.com, submitted
over 3,000 fraudulent tax returns seeking refunds totaling over $7.5 million. The IRS paid
three of the returns, resulting in refunds totaling approximately $30,000.

n. Use of Telegram. Lawal, Ambali, and their co-conspirators used
Telegram and other encrypted messaging services to instruct one another how to obtain

and use stolen PII to fraudulently obtain United States government funds. Telegram is an

Plea Agreement - 9 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
eo Se YN DH AH BP W WH

oO wo NY NY HY LY NY NO BRP BeBe Re Se Ee EE Ele
NY DH un FP Ww NY KF DOD ODO fF NHI Dn fF WY NY SH SC

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 10 of 19

encrypted, cloud-based, centralized instant messaging system that is accessible from
electronic devices such as smartphones, tablets, and computers. Its features include a
channel function that allows an administrator to post to a public or private feed that
broadcasts to an unlimited number of subscribers.

oO. Lawal, Ambali, and their co-conspirators used at least one Telegram
channel that instructed its subscribers how to: purchase stolen PII from the channel
administrator or use tools that scrape the internet for PII; submit fraudulent unemployment
benefit claims to various SWAs across the nation, including ESD; and mask IP addresses
to evade detection. The channel also provided tutorials on how to use stolen PII to defraud
other COVID-19 benefit programs such as the SBA’s EIDL program and the Treasury’s
Emergency Rental Assistance Program.

p. Through the foregoing conduct, Lawal, with intent to defraud,
knowingly devised and participated in a scheme to obtain money and property by means
of materially false or fraudulent pretenses and representations, and used interstate wire
communication to carry out the scheme. Defendant engaged in these fraudulent activities
from outside of the United States. During and in relation to this scheme, Lawal knowingly
possessed and used, without legal authority, means of identification of persons whom
Lawal knew to be real people.

The parties agree that the Court may consider additional facts contained in the
Presentence Report (subject to standard objections by the parties) and/or that may be
presented by the United States or Defendant at the time of sentencing, and that the factual
statement contained herein is not intended to limit the facts that the parties may present to
the Court at the time of sentencing.

9. Sentencing Factors. The parties agree that the following Sentencing

Guidelines provisions apply to this case:

The following provisions apply to defendant’s conviction on cout, Da Qy

a. A base offense level of 7; pursuant to USSG § 2B1.1(a)(1);

Plea Agreement - 10 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Oo Oo SN DO A FP WH HN ke

rr) i) bo do i) i) NO iw) me _ — — — — — — —
~~] ON in > eS) bo e So \O io) ~~] aN nn as Wo bo — a]

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 11 of 19

b. An increase of 14 points because the loss from the offense exceeded
$550,000 but was less than $1,500,000, pursuant to USSG § 2B1.1(b)(1)(H);

c. An increase of two points because the offense involved 10 or more
victims, pursuant to USSG § 2B1.1(b)(2)(A);

d. An increase of two points because the offense involved sophisticated
means and a substantial part of the offense was committed from outside the United States,
pursuant to USSG § 2B1.1(b)(10); and

e. An increase of two points because the offense involved benefits
authorized under a presidentially-declared major disaster or emergency, pursuant to USSG
§ 2B1.1(b)(12).

The Guideline sentence for defendant’s conviction on Count 16 is a period of
imprisonment of 24 months, pursuant to USSG § 2B1.6 and 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.

The parties agree they are free to present arguments regarding the applicability of
all other provisions of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Defendant understands,
however, that at the time of sentencing, the Court is free to reject these stipulated
adjustments, and is further free to apply additional downward or upward adjustments in
determining Defendant’s Sentencing Guidelines range.

10. Zero Point Offender. Based on the evidence known to the United States at
the time of this Plea Agreement, the United States believes Defendant may be eligible for
a sentencing adjustment pursuant to the Zero Point Offender provisions at USSG §
4C1.1(a)(1)-(10). Those provisions require: (1) the defendant did not receive any criminal
history points; (2) the defendant did not receive an adjustment under §3A1.4 (Terrorism);
(3) the defendant did not use violence or credible threats of violence in connection with the
offense; (4) the offense did not result in death or serious bodily injury; (5) the instant
offense of conviction is not a sex offense; (6) the defendant did not personally cause
substantial financial hardship; (7) the defendant did not possess, receive, purchase,

transport, transfer, sell, or otherwise dispose of a firearm or other dangerous weapon (or

Plea Agreement - 11 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States y. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
oOo Oo NN DO OA BR WH HBO He

oO wp PN WV HN NY WN KN He Fe Fe HE Ee Ee Oe Ree
in © 2 = OO OO O° >) ©)  ~ © ~ nL 2 a ca

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 12 of 19

induce another participant to do so) in connection with the offense; (8) the instant offense
of conviction is not covered by §2H1.1 (Offenses Involving Individual Rights); (9) the
defendant did not receive an adjustment under §3A1.1 (Hate Crime Motivation or
Vulnerable Victim) or §3A1.5 (Serious Human Rights Offense); and (10) the defendant
did not receive an adjustment under §3B1.1 (Aggravating Role) and was not engaged in a
continuing criminal enterprise, as defined in 21 U.S.C. § 848.

If, at the time of sentencing, the United States is satisfied Defendant has met each
of these ten requirements, the United States will recommend a Zero Point Offender
adjustment to Defendant’s sentencing range pursuant to USSG § 4C1.1(a). Defendant
understands, however, that the Court will ultimately decide whether Defendant qualifies
for any sentencing adjustment that comports with the Zero Point Offender provisions.

11. Acceptance of Responsibility. At sentencing, if the Court concludes
Defendant qualifies for a downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility pursuant
to USSG § 3E1.1(a) and Defendant’s offense level is 16 or greater, the United States will
make the motion necessary to permit the Court to decrease the total offense level by three
(3) levels pursuant to USSG §§ 3E1.1(a) and (b), because Defendant has assisted the United
States by timely notifying the United States of Defendant’s intention to plead guilty,
thereby permitting the United States to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the Court
to allocate its resources efficiently.

12. Recommendation Regarding Imprisonment. Pursuant to Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(B), the government agrees to recommend that the appropriate
term of imprisonment to be imposed by the Court at the time of sentencing is a term of.no
more than 41 months for Count 3 and a term of 24 months for Count 16, which shall run
consecutive to the sentence for Count 3. Defendant understands that this is a below-
Guidelines sentencing recommendation. Defendant is free to recommend any sentence.

Defendant understands that this recommendation is not binding on the Court and the Court

"|| may reject the recommendation of the parties and may impose any term of imprisonment

Plea Agreement - 12 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Oo S&S SN DB WO FF WD PO —&

NN we HN PO BD KR BR Rm ee es ep
ee >) © 7 re = © > CO i <> > © +. i ©? >) ©. a ©) 2s O° a a ci)

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 13 of 19

up to the statutory maximum penalty authorized by law. Defendant further understands
that Defendant cannot withdraw a guilty plea simply because of the sentence imposed by
the Court. Except as otherwise provided in this Plea Agreement, the parties are free to
present arguments regarding any other aspect of sentencing.

13. Restitution. Defendant shall make restitution in the amount of $1,345,472,
to the U.S. Department of Labor and Internal Revenue Service, as specified in the
judgment, with credit for any amounts already paid.

a. The full amount of restitution shall be due and payable immediately
on entry of judgment and shall be paid as quickly as possible. If the Court finds that the
defendant is unable to make immediate restitution in full and sets a payment schedule as
contemplated in 18 U.S.C. § 3664(f), Defendant agrees that the Court’s schedule represents
a minimum payment obligation and does not preclude the U.S. Attorney’s Office from
pursuing any other means by which to satisfy the defendant’s full and immediately-
enforceable financial obligation, including, but not limited to, by pursuing assets that come
to light only after the district court finds that the defendant is unable to make immediate
restitution.

b. Defendant agrees to disclose all assets in which Defendant has any
interest or over which Defendant exercises control, directly or indirectly, including those
held by a spouse, nominee, or third party. Defendant agrees to cooperate fully with the
United States’ investigation identifying all property in which Defendant has an interest and
with the United States’ lawful efforts to enforce prompt payment of the financial
obligations to be imposed in connection with this prosecution. Defendant’s cooperation
obligations are: (1) before sentencing, and no more than 30 days after executing this Plea
Agreement, truthfully and completely executing a Financial Disclosure Statement provided
by the United States Attorney’s Office and signed under penalty of perjury regarding

Defendant’s and Defendant’s spouse’s financial circumstances and producing supporting

‘documentation, including tax returns, as requested; (2) providing updates with. any

Plea Agreement - 13 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
oOo S&S YN DW WH FP WD YP Fe

BN pO CP KO PO DO KH ROR RR eRe ee eee ee
SI DB ON FBP W NYO KF OD OBO DB nN DW A FP WD LH KS OS

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 14 of 19

material changes in circumstances, as described in 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k), within seven days
of the event giving rise to the changed circumstances; (3) authorizing the United States
Attorney’s Office to obtain Defendant’s credit report before sentencing; (4) providing
waivers, consents or releases requested by the U.S. Attorney’s Office to access records to
verify the financial information; (5) authorizing the U.S. Attorney’s Office to inspect and
copy all financial documents and information held by the U.S. Probation Office; (6)
submitting to an interview regarding Defendant’s Financial Statement and supporting
documents before sentencing (if requested by the United States Attorney’s Office), and
fully and truthfully answering questions during such interview; and (7) notifying the United
States Attorney’s Office before transferring any interest in property owned directly or
indirectly by Defendant, including any interest held or owned in any other name, including
all forms of business entities and trusts.

C. The parties acknowledge that voluntary payment of restitution prior
to the adjudication of guilt is a factor the Court considers in determining whether Defendant
qualifies for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to USSG § 3E1.1(a).

14. Forfeiture of Assets. Defendant agrees to forfeit to the United States
immediately Defendant’s right, title, and interest in any and all property, real or personal,
that constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offense of wire fraud, as
charged in Count 3 of the Indictment. All such property is forfeitable pursuant to Title 18,
United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section
2461(c), and includes but is not limited to a judgment for a sum of money reflecting the
proceeds Defendant personally obtained as a result of the offense.

Defendant understands and acknowledges that any property forfeited will be
separate and distinct from any restitution that is ordered in this case. Defendant further
understands and acknowledges to request restoration, the United States Attorney’s Office
(the “USAO”) must send a request to the Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section

(“MLARS”) of the Department of Justice, that includes the representations outlined in the

Plea Agreement - 14 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Oo CO YQ DW WN BP WW WHO

Oo wpo NO WN NY NY NY KN KF YF KF HF FSF FEF EO ES ES Re
Se > en ©) i > ©. Se \? Ss Ss > in. © © i. i ©) io. i ~ © + in \* i ac)

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 15 of 19

Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual (2023), Chapter 14, Sec. I.B. and 28 C.F.R. Part 9.8,
which are summarized as follows: (i) all known victims have been properly notified of
the restitution proceedings and are properly accounted for in the restitution order; (ii) to
the best of the USAO’s knowledge and belief after consultation with the seizing agency,
the losses described in the restitution order have been verified, comport with the
remission requirements, and reflect all sources of compensation received by the victims,
including returns on investments, interest payments, insurance proceeds, refunds,
settlement payments, lawsuit awards, and any other sources of compensation for their
losses; (iii) to the best of the USAO’s knowledge and belief after consultation with the
seizing agency, reasonable efforts to locate additional assets establish that the victims do
not have recourse reasonably available to obtain compensation for their losses from other
assets, including those owned or controlled by the defendant(s); and (iv) there is no
evidence to suggest that any of the victims knowingly contributed to, participated in,
benefitted from, or acted in a willfully blind manner, toward the commission of the
offenses underlying the forfeiture or a related offense. The USAO agrees that if it can
make these required representations, then the USAO will submit a restoration request to
MLARS, seeking approval for any assets forfeited to be restored to the victims in this
case, which may, in turn, satisfy in full or part any restitution order. Defendant further
understands and acknowledges that the Attorney General, or his/her designee, has the
sole discretion to approve or deny the restoration request. The United States also agrees
that the amount Defendant pays toward restitution will be credited against this forfeited
sum.

The United States reserves its right to proceed against any remaining property not
identified in this Plea Agreement, including any property in which the Defendant has any
interest or control, if that property constitutes or is traceable to proceeds of his commission

of the wire-fraud scheme described above.

Plea Agreement - 15 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Oo OO YN DW WH BP W PO

moO po Po NY PV KN WD NO RR Re Re Re Re ee
SID nH SP WD NY KF COD CO BW IND Dm FP WwW NH KY DS

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 16 of 19

15. Abandonment of Contraband. Defendant also agrees that, if any federal
law enforcement agency seized any illegal contraband that was in Defendant’s direct or
indirect control, Defendant consents to the federal administrative disposition, official use,
and/or destruction of that contraband.

16. Non-Prosecution of Additional Offenses. As part of this Plea Agreement,
the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington agrees not to
prosecute Defendant for any additional offenses known to it as of the time of this Plea
Agreement based upon evidence in its possession at this time, and that arise out of the
conduct giving rise to this investigation, and moves to dismiss the remaining counts in the
Indictment at the time of sentencing. In this regard, Defendant recognizes the United States
has agreed not to prosecute all of the criminal charges the evidence establishes were
committed by Defendant solely because of the promises made by Defendant in this Plea
Agreement. Defendant agrees, however, that for purposes of preparing the Presentence
Report, the United States Attorney’s Office will provide the United States Probation Office
with evidence of all conduct committed by Defendant.

Defendant agrees that any charges to be dismissed before or at the time of sentencing
were substantially justified in light of the evidence available to the United States, were not
vexatious, frivolous or taken in bad faith, and do not provide Defendant with a basis for
any future claims under the “Hyde Amendment,” Pub. L. No. 105-119 (1997).

17. Breach, Waiver, and Post-Plea Conduct. Defendant agrees that, if
Defendant breaches this Plea Agreement: (a) the United States may withdraw from this
Plea Agreement and Defendant may be prosecuted for all offenses for which the United
States has evidence; (b) Defendant will not oppose any steps taken by the United States to
nullify this Plea Agreement, including the filing of a motion to withdraw from the Plea
Agreement; and (c) Defendant waives any objection to the re-institution of any charges

that previously were dismissed or any additional charges that had not been prosecuted.

Plea Agreement - 16 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RIB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
So Oo SN DWN WH BR WY KL

OW BO HY BH NY KH DB NO mmm ee ee ea i
SI DN WA BP WH NO KY TD OBO fF HN HD OH FP WD YN KK OC

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 17 of 19

Defendant further understands that if, after the date of this Plea Agreement,
Defendant should engage in illegal conduct, or conduct that violates any conditions of
release or the conditions of confinement (examples of which include, but are not limited
to, obstruction of justice, failure to appear for a court proceeding, criminal conduct while
pending sentencing, and false statements to law enforcement agents, the Pretrial Services
Officer, Probation Officer, or Court), the United States is free under this Plea Agreement
to file additional charges against Defendant or to seek a sentence that takes such conduct
into consideration by requesting the Court to apply additional adjustments or enhancements
in its Sentencing Guidelines calculations in order to increase the applicable advisory
Guidelines range, and/or by seeking an upward departure or variance from the calculated
advisory Guidelines range. Under these circumstances, the United States is free to seek
such adjustments, enhancements, departures, and/or variances even if otherwise precluded
by the terms of the Plea Agreement.

18. Waiver of Appellate Rights and Rights to Collateral Attacks. Defendant
acknowledges that, by entering the guilty pleas required by this Plea Agreement, Defendant
waives all rights to appeal from Defendant’s conviction, and any pretrial rulings of the
Court, and any rulings of the Court made prior to entry of the judgment of conviction.
Defendant further agrees that, provided the Court imposes a custodial sentence that is
within or below the Sentencing Guidelines range (or the statutory mandatory minimum, if
greater than the Guidelines range) as determined by the Court at the time of sentencing,
Defendant waives to the full extent of the law:

a. Any right conferred by Title 18, United States Code, Section 3742, to
challenge, on direct appeal, the sentence imposed by. the Court, including any fine,
restitution order, probation or supervised release conditions, or forfeiture order (if

applicable); and

Plea Agreement - 17 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
Oo CO NN WB A FB YW WO ee

|
ae Oo OO CO HN DH OO FP WY NYO KS O&O

23
24
25
26
27

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 18 of 19

b. Any right to bring a collateral attack against the conviction and
sentence, including any restitution order imposed, except as it may relate to the
effectiveness of legal representation.

This waiver does not preclude Defendant from bringing an appropriate motion
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, to address the conditions of Defendant’s confinement or the
decisions of the Bureau of Prisons regarding the execution of Defendant’s sentence.

If Defendant breaches this Plea Agreement at any time by appealing or collaterally
attacking (except as to effectiveness of legal representation) the conviction or sentence in
any way, the United States may prosecute Defendant for any counts, including those with
mandatory minimum sentences, that were dismissed or not charged pursuant to this Plea
Agreement.

19. Voluntariness of Plea. Defendant agrees that Defendant has entered into
this Plea Agreement freely and voluntarily, and that no threats or promises were made to
induce Defendant to enter a plea of guilty other than the promises contained in this Plea
Agreement or set forth on the record at the change of plea hearing in this matter.

20. Statute of Limitations. In the event this Plea Agreement is not accepted by
the Court for any reason, or Defendant breaches any of the terms of this Plea Agreement,
the statute of limitations shall be deemed to have been tolled from the date of the Plea
Agreement to: (1) thirty (30) days following the date of non-acceptance of the Plea
Agreement by the Court; or (2) thirty (30) days following the date on which a breach of
the Plea Agreement by Defendant is discovered by the United States Attorney’s Office.

21. Completeness of Plea Agreement. The United States and Defendant
acknowledge that these terms constitute the entire Plea Agreement between the parties,
except as may be set forth on the record at the change of plea hearing in this matter. This
Plea Agreement binds only the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of
if

Plea Agreement - 18 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970
So © ND A BR W HNO

rR bdo KO KR DD KR NR ee ee ee
ae © > © 2 Oe © Co <> © oc. Ps © > iL ©) Sr Sn © sO Sn oo nr a)

Case 3:23-cr-05034-RJB Document 60 Filed 09/12/24 Page 19 of 19

Washington. It does not bind any other United States Attorney’s Office or any other office
or agency of the United States, or any state or local prosecutor.

Dated this 12th day of September, 2024.

FATIU ISMAILA LAWAL
Defendant

-) ~
Hue TO Door
PAULA T. OLSON

Attorney for Defendant

Calan —y

CINDY CHANG
Assistant United States att eer

Plea Agreement - 19 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
United States v. Lawal, CR23-5034-01 RJB 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 553-7970

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.wawd.318629.60.0.pdf

Size

1,138,411 bytes

SHA-256

449a605e20ee9e08ed4be22ed2c516a29d3a21c0f67c4f8ba739fe9d49fd25d8

Our copy

gov.uscourts.wawd.318629.60.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)