Exhibit 18 - Joint Declaration of Plaintiffs in Support of Motion for Class… — Marshall Prestamos (Dkt. 139.19)

Summary

Exhibit 18, a Joint Declaration of Plaintiffs in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification in Marshall v. Prestamos CDFI, LLC, Civil Action No. 5:21-cv-04337-JMG, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Document 139-19, filed 09/06/24. The declarants, including Alicia Marshall, Paris Townsend and Sharon Bradley Smith, state that their Paycheck Protection Program loans were approved by the SBA but not funded by Prestamos and that they remain obligated under their loan notes. They state that their SBA-approved loan amounts ranged from $1,875.00 to $20,832.00. They ask the court to certify two classes, appoint them class representatives and appoint Bailey & Glasser, LLP and Nolan Heller Kauffman LLP as class counsel.

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

Full text

Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG Document 139-19 Filed 09/06/24 Page1of6

EX. 18 -- JOINT DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFFS
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
CLASS CERTIFICATION
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG Document 139-19 Filed 09/06/24 Page2of6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ALICIA MARSHALL, et al., individually

and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Civil Action No. 5:21-cv-04337-JMG
Plaintiffs,

Vv.
PRESTAMOS CDFI, LLC,

Defendant.

JOINT DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFFS IN SUPPORT OF
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

We plaintiffs Alicia Marshall, Paris Townsend, Kristina Henderson, Jamie Jones, John
Martin, Gregory Lloyd, Alyshia Johnson, Lametria Marvel, Jahbrael Horne and Sharon Bradley
Smith (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) declare to the best of our knowledge, information and belief
under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United State of America as follows:

1. We submit this Joint Declaration in support of our motion for class certification.
We have personal knowledge about the information in this Joint Declaration and would testify
consistent with this information if asked to do so.

2. We have retained plaintiffs’ counsel to prosecute this litigation for us as a class
action, specifically the firms of Bailey & Glasser LLP and Nolan Heller Kauffman LLP.

3. This case is about Prestamos’ failure to fund our Paycheck Protection Program
(“PPP”) loans and the PPP loans of many other borrowers who, like us, had loans approved by
the Small Business Administration (the “SBA”’) but not funded. Prestamos also submitted false
reports to the SBA indicating that it funded our loans to obtain the loan processing fee, and

obtained money from the federal government to fund our loans. This case is also about some of
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG Document 139-19 Filed 09/06/24 Page3of6

the other consequences of Prestamos’ failure to fund our PPP loans, including that we also were
“locked into” and had to rely on Prestamos under the PPP to actually fund our loans; we were
deprived of the opportunity to obtain PPP loan forgiveness which the bulk of all PPP funded loan
borrowers obtained; and we are still obligated under our PPP loan note agreements with
Prestamos to pay back to Prestamos PPP loan proceeds we never received, plus interest. All
plaintiffs and class members share these alleged facts.

4, We also are committed to continue to prosecute this case and ready, willing and
able to continue to serve if the Court appoints us as class representatives. We believe the Court
certifying the classes and appointing us as class representatives is especially important in this
case for several reasons. First, although we seek certification of a class of unfunded Prestamos
borrowers only in plaintiffs’ respective states and not a national class, we understand that even
this already reduced class size includes thousands of class members who failed to receive many
millions of dollars of guaranteed, forgivable loans while Prestamos still collected millions of
dollars in fees on those loans. Second, under our note agreements with Prestamos, we are still
obligated to repay Prestamos loans we never received plus interest. That of course makes us even
worse off than not receiving funding in the first place. And we understand that Prestamos has
already attempted to collect repayment from some of us such as plaintiff Lloyd as detailed in
paragraphs 297 — 298 of the Third Amended Complaint, including with quotes directly from
Prestamos’ own collections correspondence. Third, our SBA-approved loan amounts ranged
from $1,875.00 to $20,832.00. It is therefore unlikely that we and other class members whose
loans were also approved in relatively limited amounts could retain other lawyers and sue on any

basis other than in a class action that groups us all together. In sum, absent class certification and
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG Document 139-19 Filed 09/06/24 Page4of6

our appointment as class representatives, we will very likely lose even the opportunity to obtain
any relief and worse yet still be bound to repay Prestamos.

5. Since the inception of our participation in this case, we have worked closely with
our attorneys; received numerous status reports from them and followed up with them for other
information; produced relevant documents; responded to several rounds of written discovery
from Prestamos and its corporate parent, Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc. (“CPLC”), including two
rounds of interrogatory requests and document requests; and engaged in a variety of related
tasks. We also diligently searched for and provided tax returns and bank account statements or
certifications as Prestamos requested and the Court directed; provided verifications to our
interrogatory responses; prepared for and gave testimony during Prestamos’ depositions of each
of us; and worked with our attorneys as part of our request for class certification in support of
which we make this Joint Declaration among other things.

6. Each of our PPP loans was approved by the SBA. Had Prestamos actually funded
our loans, we would have used the proceeds for our business. Also, because Prestamos failed to
fund our PPP loans, we were unable to obtain PPP loan forgiveness as the PPP was designed to
do, since we could not certify to the SBA that we used the PPP proceeds for purposes consistent
with the PPP, such as to pay salary and rent. We could not make that representation because
Prestamos failed to ultimately fund our PPP loans. So we were injured by both not receiving the
loans; by being denied the opportunity to obtain loan forgiveness; and by still being bound under
the notes that we entered into with Prestamos to pay back to Prestamos the very PPP loan
proceeds Prestamos failed to get to us, plus interest. These injuries are shared by all plaintiffs and

class members according to the definition of the class.
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG Document 139-19 Filed 09/06/24 Page5of6

7. We understand that we owe a duty to all members of the two proposed classes to
do all we can to provide fair and adequate representation, and to continue to work with our
attorneys to seek the highest recovery and best relief possible consistent with good faith and as
the Court may permit. Specifically, we seek two classes be certified. First, we want Prestamos to
pay us money damages as part of the first class. Second, we seek that the Court release us from
any obligation to repay Prestamos. We intend to continue to pursue this relief for each of us and
for the benefit of the classes if the Court honors us with our appointment as a class
representative. Each of us has also already testified in deposition as we noted previously, and we
are also willing to testify at trial if necessary in Allentown, Pennsylvania.

8. We believe that the Court should certify the two classes as requested and
respectfully ask the Court to do so; certify us as class representatives; and appoint our lawyers,
Bailey & Glasser, LLP and Nolan Heller Kauffman LLP, as class counsel.

We declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that
the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed as of this 6th, day of September 2024.

Alicia Marshall

Paris Townsend

Paris Townsend

Kristina Henderson

lnie Jones

Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG Document 139-19 Filed 09/06/24 Page6éof6

John Martin

Grsge Lloyd
Gree&t¥ LloydZ

Alyéhia J ohngn

Lametria Marvel

Qahbrach Norne

Yhbrael Horne

Sharon Smeth

Sharon Bradley Smith

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.paed.589575.139.19.pdf

Size

1,545,058 bytes

SHA-256

8ac01e565f6f2128972ceabb4645ec5a39e49e203925e82f4b9c825eedc70232

Our copy

gov.uscourts.paed.589575.139.19.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)