Indictment — No. 2:21-cr-00154 (Dkt. 1, N.D. Ind.)

Summary

The indictment of Jeffrey Boylett filed November 17, 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Cause No. 2:21CR154, citing 18 U.S.C. § 1348. It describes the SBA's Economic Injury Disaster Loan program and its application requirements, including that a business must have been in operation before February 1, 2020. It alleges that an application for "Bills" claimed 5 employees, gross revenue of $240,000 and existence since 3/2/1999 when the business did not exist, and that Boylett e-signed a loan agreement as its owner. Counts 1-4 charge that Boylett caused the use of interstate wires, and the indictment seeks forfeiture.

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.

USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 1 filed 11/17/21 page 1of6

~FTLED-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT py 4 7
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 2021

HAMMOND DIVISION TBE Ce

U.S. DISTRICT COUR
NORTHERN DISTRICT GF INDIANA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) CAUSE NO.
. ) 2:210R154
) 18 U.S.C. § 1348 ;
JEFFREY BOYLETT )
INDICTMENT

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:
At time material to this Indictment:

1. The Small Business Administration (SBA) was a federal agency
that provided financial support to small businesses to help them recover after
disasters.

2. One of the programs SBA administered during the presidentially
declared emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic was the Economic
Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program.

3. Under the EIDL program, the SBA provided low-interest loans to
small businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. EIDL funds were to be
used for payroll expenses, sick leave, production costs, and business

obligations, such as debts, rent, and mortgage payments.


USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 1 filed 11/17/21 page 2 of 6

A, To obtain EIDL money, an authorized representative of a
qualified business was required to submit an intake application form to SBA
through an online portal.

5. In the electronic application form, an applicant was required to
provide information about their business’s operations, including the number
of employees, gross revenue for the 12-month period preceding the disaster,
and cost of goods sold in the 12-month period before the disaster.

6. For a business to be eligible for an EIDL, it must have been in
operation before February 1, 2020.

7. An EIDL applicant was also required to certify that all of the
information in the application form was true and correct. The applicant was
notified that false statements could result in criminal penalties.

8. An EIDL applicant was also eligible to receive money from SBA
in the form of a grant that did not need to be repaid.

9. Approval of an EIDL application and the amount of any grant or
loan was based on the information provided on the application form.

10. SBA disbursed EIDL funds to a successful applicant’s bank
account via ACH payment from the U.S. Treasury Department.

SCHEME TO DEFRAUD

11. From approximately April 2020 to July 2020, in the Northern
District of Indiana and elsewhere, Jeffery Boylett (hereinafter Defendant

2

USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 1 filed 11/17/21 page 3 of 6

Boylett), knowingly devised and participated in a scheme to defraud SBA by
applying for and receiving SBA grant and loan funds for a fictious business.

PURPOSE OF SCHEME

12. The purpose of the scheme was to obtain money from SBA by
means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and

promises, and by concealment of material facts.

MANNER AND MEANS

13. It was part of the scheme that Defendant Boylett used the
internet to submit a fraudulent SBA intake application form to obtain EIDL
funds on behalf of a fictitious business, he called “Bills”.

14. It was further part of the scheme that in response to questions on
the application form, he filled in responses to make it appear that the
fictional business, “Bills”, was engaged in “health services”; that it had “5”
employees and gross revenue of “$240,000”; and that it had existed since
“3/2/1999”, when in fact the business did not exist.

15. It was further part of the scheme that Defendant Boylett affixed
his e-signature to a KIDL loan agreement on behalf of “Bills” as its
owner/officer, when in fact he owned no such company.

16. It was further part of the scheme that Defendant Boylett
collected approximately $109,900 in proceeds from the SBA to which he was

not entitled.

USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 1 filed 11/17/21 page 4of6

USE OF THE WIRES IN SCHEME TO DEFRAUD

17. Throughout the scheme to defraud, Defendant Boylett knowingly

caused the use of interstate wires.

COUNTS 1-4

18. Paragraphs 1-17 are incorporated here.

19. Onor about the following dates in the Northern District of
Indiana and elsewhere;

JEFFREY BOYLETT,

having knowingly and intentionally devised and participated in the scheme
and artifice to defraud described above, did knowingly send and cause to be
sent by wire communications in interstate commerce, certain writings, signs,
and signals for the purpose of executing and attempting to execute the

scheme and artifice to defraud, including the following:

ON OR ABOUT | VIRING

1 April 10, 2020 Submission of fraudulent SBA Intake
Application #..5352) via the internet

2 June 15, 2020 Submission of fraudulent loan agreement
#...7910) via the internet

3 June 26, 2020 Receipt via electronic ACH payment of SBA

funds in the amount of $104,900 into
checking account (#...4779)

4 July 7, 2020 Receipt via electronic ACH payment of SBA
funds in the amount of $5,000 into checking
account #...4779_ )

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 13438.

4

USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 1 filed 11/17/21 page5of6

FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS

1. The allegations contained in Counts 1-4 of this Indictment are hereby
realleged and by this reference fully incorporated herein for the purpose of
alleging forfeiture to the United States of America pursuant to Title 18,
United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States Code,
Section 2461(c).

2. Upon conviction of the offenses in violation of Title 18, United States
Code, Section 1343, alleged in Counts 1-4 of the Indictment, the defendant
shall forfeit to the United States of America pursuant to Title 18, United
States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section
2461(c), any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from
proceeds traceable to the offense(s).

3. Upon conviction of an offense set forth in in this Indictment, the
government will seek a money judgment in the amount of proceeds received
for the defendant’s participation in the alleged scheme.

4. If any of the property described above, 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;

USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 1 filed 11/17/21 page 6 of 6

d. has been substantially diminished in value; or
e. has been commingled with other property which 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), as
incorporated by Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c).
All pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(C).
A TRUE BILL:

/s/ Foreperson.

FOREPERSON

CLIFFORD D. JOHNSON
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

BY: _/s/ Molly Kelley

Molly Kelley
Tom McGrath
Assistant United States Attorneys

File and source

File

1.pdf

Size

165,897 bytes

SHA-256

2ec09f80f494735b5df5dc4f6e32e3b813d38f087aa50250cfcddd98f3a994c9

Our copy

1.pdf