Indictment — No. 2:20-cr-20433 (Dkt. 18, E.D. Mich.)

Summary

An indictment in United States v. Samuel George Baker, Case 2:20-cr-20433, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, filed September 16, 2020 as ECF No. 18. It describes federal pandemic assistance to state unemployment insurance agencies, including the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, which became law on March 18, 2020. It charges that Baker submitted false and fraudulent UI benefit claims to the state of Pennsylvania and elsewhere in the names of various individuals without their knowledge, falsely certifying that each claimant was unemployed due to Covid-19. The cited violations are 18 U.S.C. § 1343, § 1028A and § 1029.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.46 Filed 09/16/20 Page 1 of 10

                    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                    EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

 United States of America,
                                         Case:2:20-cr-20433
       Plaintiff,                        Judge: Tamow, Arthur J.
               °                         MJ: Patti, Anthony P.
                                          Filed: 09-16-2020 At 03:27 PM
 V.                                       INDI USA V. BAKER (NA)

 D-1 Samuel George Baker,                       Violations:
                                                18 US.C. § 1343
       Defendant.                               18 U.S.C. § 1028A
                                      /         18 U.S.C. § 1029

                               INDICTMENT

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:

                        GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

At all times relevant to this Indictment:

1.    In response to the novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic, the

federal government has taken a number of steps to provide urgently needed

financial assistance to the States.

2.    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), which became law

on March 18, 2020, provided additional flexibility for State unemployment

insurance agencies and additional administrative funding to respond to the

Covid-19 pandemic.

3.    The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was

signed into law on March 27, 2020, and further expanded the ability of the States

ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.47 Filed 09/16/20 Page 2 of 10

to provide unemployment insurance (UD) for many workers impacted by the
COVID-19 pandemic, including workers who are not ordinarily eligible for
unemployment benefits.

4. The Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) program was
created under the aforementioned statutes and allowed eligible individuals who are
collecting certain UI benefits, including regular unemployment compensation, to
receive an additional $600 in federal benefits per week for weeks of
unemployment ending on or before July 31, 2020.

5. Additionally, the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation
(PEUC) program was created and allows those who have exhausted benefits under
regular unemployment compensation or other programs to receive up to 13 weeks
of additional federally funded benefits

6. In order to obtain any of the above-referenced benefits, an individual must
initiate a claim. The overwhelming majority of unemployment claims have been
filed online through state-organized websites. In most cases, in order to be eligible
for unemployment benefits, the worker must demonstrate a certain level of
earnings in several quarters immediately preceding the application. The amount of
unemployment benefits that an unemployment claimant might be eligible for
depends on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the length of his or

her previous employment and the amount of wages he or she earned. However,


ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.48 Filed 09/16/20 Page 3 of 10

under the programs outlined above, certain individuals may be now be eligible for
UI benefits (or eligible for a greater amount of UI benefits) than they would be if
not for various federal programs.

7. Different states have different ways of providing claimants with UI benefits.
One way in which the State of Pennsylvania provides benefits is through the use of
a prepaid debit card, issued by US Bank and sent to the claimant through the mail.
In the State of Michigan, similar prepaid cards are issued by Bank of America, and
are also mailed to the claimant. If a claim is approved, unemployment benefits are
loaded onto the debit card(s) electronically, and additional benefits are loaded onto
the card(s) electronically every two weeks. Alternatively, a claimant can provide a
bank routing number and bank account in which to have their unemployment
benefits directly deposited electronically. Additional benefits are then deposited
into the bank account electronically every two weeks.

COUNTS ONE - FOUR
18 U.S.C. § 1343 - Wire Fraud

D-1 Samuel George Baker

8. The allegations in paragraphs 1 - 7 are hereby repeated, realleged, and
incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

9. Beginning on a date unknown to the grand jury, but at least as early as June
25, 2020, and continuing through at least July 28, 2020, in the Eastern District of

Michigan, Southern Division, and elsewhere, Defendant Samuel George Baker,

3


ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.49 Filed 09/16/20 Page 4 of 10

with the intent to defraud, knowingly devised and executed a scheme and artifice
to defraud and obtain money and property by means of materially false and
fraudulent pretenses and representations.

10. The purpose of the scheme and artifice to defraud was for Defendant to
unlawfully obtain state and federal UI benefits.

11. It was part of the scheme and artifice that Defendant would submit false and
fraudulent UI benefit claims to the state of Pennsylvania (and elsewhere) in the
name(s) of various individuals, without those individuals’ knowledge or approval.
12. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that Defendant would use
these individuals’ social security numbers and other personally identifiable
information (PII) in the course of the UI benefit claim submission process.

13. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that, for each of the submitted
UI benefit claims, the Defendant would falsely certify that the purported claimant
was unemployed due to Covid-19.

14. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that, for each of the submitted
UI benefit claims, Defendant would cause US Bank to mail a debit card to an
address within his control. These debit cards were then loaded, electronically, with

state and federal UI benefits by the Pennsylvania Department of Treasury.


ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.50 Filed 09/16/20 Page 5 of 10

15. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that once Defendant obtained
these debit cards, he would use them to make withdrawals from various ATMs in
the Eastern District of Michigan.

16. On or about the dates set forth below, in the Eastern District of Michigan,
for the purpose of executing and attempting to execute the above-described scheme
and artifice to defraud, Defendant knowingly transmitted and caused the
transmission by means of wire radio, or television communication in interstate or
foreign commerce, the following writings, signs, signal, pictures, and sounds; with

each transmission being a separate count of the indictment:

Count Date of Nature of Wire Victim Amount
———=| Transaction Transmission ——__ | Withdrawn
1 | July 11, 2020 Debit card MH. $500
transaction
2 | July 11,2020 Debit card MH. $500
transaction
3 | July 17, 2020 Debit card DB. $500
transaction
4 | July 17, 2020 Debit card DB. $500
transaction

17. All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

COUNTS 5-6
18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1)

D-1 Samuel George Baker
18. The allegations in paragraphs 1 - 17 are hereby repeated, realleged, and

incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
5


ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.51 Filed 09/16/20 Page 6 of 10

19. Onor about the dates listed below, in the Eastern District of Michigan,
Southern Division, and elsewhere, Defendant Samuel George Baker, did
knowingly possess, use and transfer, without lawful authority, one or more means
of identification of another person—that is, names and Social Security Numbers—
during and in relation to a felony violation enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(c), to
wit: Wire Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C § 1343, knowing that the means of

identification belonged to another actual person:

Count Date of Use Nature of Use Victim
Application for
>. June 26, 2020 Pennsylvania UI benefits MH.
6. | June 25,2020 Application for DB.

Pennsylvania UI benefits

20. Allin violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1028A(a)(1).
COUNT 7

18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(5)
Illegal Transactions with Access Devices

D-1 Samuel George Baker

21. The allegations in paragraphs 1 - 20 are hereby repeated, realleged, and
incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

22. Inor around the months of June, July, and August, 2020, in the Eastern
District of Michigan, Defendant Samuel George Baker, knowingly and with intent

to defraud, effected transactions with access devices issued to other persons; i.e.,

ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.52 Filed 09/16/20 Page 7 of 10

35 fraudulent U.S. Bank debit cards issued by the state of Pennsylvania in the
names of various individuals; and did so in order to unlawfully obtain state and
federal unemployment insurance benefits in the name of those individuals.

23. Within the one-year period between September 1, 2019, and September 1,
2020, the Defendant obtained more than $1,000 by way of such transactions.

24. The aforementioned conduct affected interstate commerce, in that the origin
of the funds withdrawn from the cards (in Michigan) were deposit transactions
initiated by the Pennsylvania Department of Treasury (in Pennsylvania); likewise,
US Bank mailed the debit cards, in the names of each of the 35 UI benefit
claimants, to addresses within the Defendant’s control in Michigan.

25. Allin violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(5) and (c){1)(B).

FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS

26. The allegations set forth in Counts One, Two, Three, Four, and Seven of this
Indictment are hereby incorporated by reference for purposes of alleging forfeiture
pursuant to the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C)
together with Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), Title 18, United States
Code, Section 982(a)(2)(B), and Title 18, United States Code, Section
1029(c)(1)(C).

27.  Asaresult of the forgoing violations of Title 18, United States Code,

Section 1343, as charged in Counts One, Two, Three, and Four of this Indictment,


ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.53 Filed 09/16/20 Page 8 of 10

the Defendant shall forfeit to the United States any property, real or personal,
which constitutes, or is derived from, any proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly,
as a result of such violation(s), pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section
981(a)(1)(C) together with Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c).

28.  Asaresult of the forgoing violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
| 1029(a)(5), the Defendant shall forfeit to the United States any property
constituting, or derived from, proceeds he obtained directly or indirectly as a result
of such violation, and any personal property used or intended to be used to commit
the offense, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(2)(B) and
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1029(c)(1)(C).

29. Substitute Assets: Ifthe property described above as being subject to

forfeiture, as a result of any act or omission of the Defendant:
a. Cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;
b. Has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;
c. Has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;
d. Has been substantially diminished in value; or

e. Has been commingled with other property that cannot be divided
without difficulty;

the United States of America shall be entitled to forfeiture of substitute property
pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p), and Title 28, United

States Code, Section 2461(c).

ase 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.54 Filed 09/16/20 Page 9 of 10

30. Money Judgment: Upon conviction of the violations alleged in Counts 1-4

of this Indictment, the United States will seek a forfeiture money judgment against
the Defendant in an amount equal to the total amount of proceeds he obtained as a
result of his violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343 as alleged in
this Indictment.

THIS IS A TRUE BILL

s/Grand Jury Foreperson
GRAND JURY FOREPERSON
MATTHEW SCHNEIDER
United States Attorney
JOHN K. NEAL

Chief, White Collar Crimes

s/Ryan A. Particka
RYAN A. PARTICKA
Assistant U.S. Attorney

Dated: September 16, 2020


Case 2:20-cr-20433-PDB-APP ECF No. 18, PagelD.55 Filed 09/16/20 Page 10 of 10

, —— — Case:2:20-cr-20433
United States District Court Criminal Case Cover £ — Judge: Tarnow, Arthur J.
Eastern District of Michigan MJ: Patti, Anthony P.
Filed: 09-16-2020 At 03:27 PM
INDI USA V. BAKER (NA)

NOTE It is the responsibility of the Assistant U.S. Attorney signing this form to complete it accurately |

| Companion Case Number:

This may be a companion case based on LCrR 57.10(b)(4)!:

OYes MINo AUSA’s Initials: i A V
Case Title: USA v. Samuel George Baker
County where offense occurred: Wayne
Offense Type: Felony

Indictment -- based upon prior complaint [Case number: 20-30299]

Shperseding to Case No: Judge:
Reason:
Defendant Name Charges Prior Complaint (if applicable)

Please take notice that the below listed Assistant United States Attorney is th E

the above captioned case f / /
September 16, 2020 (1. A

attorney of record for

Date yen A. Particka
eet United States Attorney
ot W. Fort Street, Suite 2001
Detroit, MI 48226
ryan.particka@usdoj.gov
(313) 226-9635

‘ Companion cases are matters in which it appears that (1) substantially similar evidence will be offered at trial, or (2) the same or related parties are
present, and the cases arise out of the same transaction or occurrence. Cases may be companion cases even though one of them may have already
been terminated

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.mied.349407.18.0.pdf

Size

384,317 bytes

SHA-256

c9f0143c48afc0046803d8620e2a5345f115c9113b2b898ea1894d1c6734dc1b

Our copy

gov.uscourts.mied.349407.18.0.pdf

Original

archive.org