First Amended Class Action Complaint — Marshall v. Prestamos CDFI, LLC (E.D. Pa. No. 5:21-cv-04337)

Record facts

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT · No. 5:21-cv-04337-JMG · Doc. 18 · 2022-01-14 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
ALICIA MARSHALL, DANIEL 
PRONSKY, PARIS TOWNSEND, 
NANCILEE HOLLAND, LEONA 
OWSLEY, KOLAWOLE AHMADOU, 
KIANA DERVIN, KRISTINA 
HENDERSON, DUSTIN INNIS, KELLY 
STALNAKER and JAMIE JONES, 
individually and on behalf of all others 
similarly situated, 
 
 
 
 
 
Plaintiffs, 
 
 
 
v. 
 
PRESTAMOS CDFI, LLC, 
 
 
 
 
 
Defendant. 
Civil Action No. 5:21-cv-04337-JMG 
 
 
AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 
 
 
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 
 
Plaintiffs Alicia Marshall, Daniel Pronsky, Paris Townsend, Nancilee Holland, Leona 
Owsley, Kolawole Ahmadou, Kiana Dervin, Kristina Henderson, Dustin Innis, Kelly Stalnaker 
and Jamie Jones (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly 
situated, file this Amended Class Action Complaint and Jury Demand for damages and equitable 
relief arising from the failure of Prestamos CDFI, LLC (“Defendant” or “Prestamos”) to fund 
approved Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP” or the “Program”) loans. In support, Plaintiffs 
make the following allegations based upon information and belief except as to the allegations 
pertaining to the Plaintiffs which are based on personal knowledge. Plaintiffs’ information and 
belief is based, among other things, on the ongoing investigation of their undersigned counsel 
which included, without limitation, a review of applicable documents, publicly-available 
information concerning the PPP and PPP loans, and media and other information, including 
information available on the Internet. Plaintiffs believe that substantial additional evidentiary 
support will exist for their allegations after a reasonable opportunity for discovery. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 1 of 61

2 
 
Summary of the Claims 
 
1. 
Following the worldwide outbreak of COVID-19, Congress passed the 
Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) to, among many other 
things, provide some relief to America’s small businesses and sole proprietors through the 
creation of the PPP. 
2. 
Administered by the United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”), the 
PPP was established to provide hundreds of billions of dollars of potentially forgivable loans to 
small businesses and sole proprietors in a quick and efficient manner. 
3. 
To ensure that small businesses and sole proprietors received PPP loan proceeds 
quickly, the applicable provisions of the PPP required lenders to fund PPP loans within ten days 
of SBA approval. 
4. 
Lenders that participated in the Program were entitled to fees payable by the SBA 
for each PPP loan the lenders processed. 
5. 
Defendant Prestamos was one of the SBA’s authorized PPP lenders. 
6. 
In 2020, Prestamos processed 935 PPP loans totaling less than $27 million gross, 
thereby reportedly receiving $1.3 million in fees. 
7. 
After the SBA substantially increased the fees lenders would receive for PPP 
loans made in 2021, Prestamos exponentially expanded its PPP lending, reportedly processing 
494,415 PPP loans totaling over $7.6 billion through May 31, 2021 -- more PPP loans than any 
other lender in 2021, and more than the total number of PPP loans made in 2021 by Bank of 
America, PNC Bank, TD Bank and Wells Fargo combined. See Paycheck Protection Program 
(PPP) Report: Approvals through 05/31/2021, at p.7,  available at 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 2 of 61

3 
 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/PPP Report Public 210531-508.pdf (last 
accessed Sept. 21, 2021). 
8. 
As a result, Prestamos has reportedly received nearly $1.2 billion in fees in 2021.  
See https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/27/business/ppp-relief-loans-blueacorn-womply.html 
(last accessed Sept. 21, 2021). 
9. 
In flagrant disregard of its contractual obligations to the class member borrowers, 
however, Prestamos failed to actually fund class member borrowers’ SBA-approved PPP loans.  
10. 
Indeed, Plaintiffs and thousands of others each timely applied for PPP loans with 
Prestamos, had their loans approved by the SBA and assigned PPP loan numbers, and yet never 
were paid their PPP loan funds by Defendant. 
Parties 
11. 
Plaintiff Alicia Marshall (“Marshall”), a natural person residing in Sacramento, 
California, is a sole proprietor of an in-home healthcare business. 
12. 
Plaintiff Daniel Pronsky (“Pronsky”), a natural person residing in Reading, 
Pennsylvania, is a sole proprietor of a food catering business. 
13. 
Plaintiff  Paris  Townsend  (“Townsend”),  a  natural  person  residing  in  San 
Bernadino, California, is a sole proprietor in the business of making and selling hair care 
products. 
14. 
Plaintiff Nancilee Holland (“Holland”), a natural person residing in Greenwich, 
Connecticut, is a sole proprietor of a real estate agency. 
15. 
Plaintiff Leona Owsley (“Owsley”), a natural person residing in El Dorado 
Springs, Missouri, is a sole proprietor of a construction business. 
16. 
Plaintiff Kolawole Ahmadou (“Ahmadou”), a natural person residing in Evanston, 
Illinois, is a sole proprietor of an in-home healthcare business. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 3 of 61

4 
 
17. 
Plaintiff Kiana Dervin (“Dervin”), a natural person residing in Lynnwood, 
Washington, is a sole proprietor of a janitorial business. 
18. 
Plaintiff Kristina Henderson (“Henderson”), a natural person residing in Macomb, 
Michigan, is a sole proprietor of a clothing business. 
19. 
Plaintiff Dustin Innis (“Innis”), a natural person residing in Las Vegas, Nevada, is 
a sole proprietor of a carpet and upholstery cleaning business.   
20. 
Plaintiff Kelly Stalnaker (“Stalnaker”), a natural person presently residing in 
Arizona but previously and at all applicable times residing in Ravenna, Ohio, was a sole 
proprietor of a homemaker/personal care provider business. 
21. 
Plaintiff Jamie Jones (“Jones”), a natural person residing in Golden Valley, 
Arizona, is a sole proprietor of a delivery service. 
22. 
Defendant Prestamos is a limited liability company organized under the laws of 
the state of Arizona, having its principal place of business at 1024 E. Buckeye Road, Suite 270, 
Phoenix, Arizona 85034, with additional offices in Tucson, Arizona, Las Vegas and Reno, 
Nevada, and purportedly Santa Fe, New Mexico, according to its website.  See Prestamos 
Locations (prestamosloans.org) (visited December, 17, 2021). 
Jurisdiction & Venue 
23. 
This Court has jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act because at least 
one member of the proposed class is a citizen of a different state than defendant Prestamos; there 
are more than 100 members of the proposed class; and the aggregate amount in controversy 
exceeds $5,000,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2)(A). 
24. 
Venue is proper in this judicial District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a 
substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this District. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 4 of 61

5 
 
Additional Factual Allegations 
 
Background Concerning the  
COVID-19 Pandemic and the PPP 
 
25. 
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 
outbreak a “pandemic.” Two days later, on March 13, 2020, the United States declared a national 
emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 
26. 
In response, on March 27, 2020, the United States Congress passed the largest 
economic stimulus package in the nation’s history -- the CARES Act. The CARES Act 
amounted to over $2 trillion in aid, equivalent to roughly $6,000 per American, or 45% of all 
federal government spending for 2019. 
27. 
The CARES Act was enacted to provide immediate assistance to individuals, 
families, and businesses affected by the COVID-19 emergency. 
28. 
One facet of the CARES Act’s approach to economic relief was the PPP. 
Recognizing the huge strain that the COVID-19 pandemic would likely impose on American 
small businesses, the PPP initially allocated $349 billion for loans to small businesses, sole 
proprietors, and nonprofit organizations, among others. These loans were intended to pay up to 
eight weeks of payroll costs (including benefits) and could also be used to pay interest on 
mortgages, rent, and utilities. 
29. 
PPP loans are guaranteed by the SBA, and the PPP provides for loan forgiveness 
if the borrower demonstrates that the funds were used in compliance with PPP regulations. 
30. 
The PPP has received several legislative renewals, modifications, and extensions. 
On April 24, 2020, the President signed the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care 
Enhancement Act, which provided additional funding and authority for the PPP. On June 5, 
2020, the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020 was enacted, extending the 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 5 of 61

6 
 
deferral period for PPP loans, among other provisions. On July 4, 2020, the PPP was further 
amended to guarantee PPP loans to August 8, 2020. On December 27, 2020, the Economic Aid 
to Hard-Hit Small Businesses, Nonprofits, and Venues Act (the “Economic Aid Act”) was 
enacted, which further extended the PPP and allowed for the SBA to authorize second-draw PPP 
loans through March 31, 2021, available to borrowers who already used their previous PPP loan 
proceeds for permitted expenditures. On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act was 
signed into law, adding an additional $7.25 billion for PPP loans, bringing total appropriations 
for the program to $813.7 billion. Finally, on March 30, 2021, the PPP Extension Act was 
enacted, which extended the PPP application deadline to May 31, 2021, and gave the SBA until 
June 30, 2021 to process loan applications. 
31. 
PPP loans are generally available to businesses in operation as of February 15, 
2020 that had salaried employees, as well as self-employed individuals. Businesses receiving 
PPP loans cannot have more than 500 employees and cannot be in bankruptcy. Further, 
applicants are required to certify that the “current economic uncertainty makes this loan request 
necessary to support the ongoing operations of the Applicant.” Currently, at least 60% of the 
proceeds must be used for payroll costs. The entire amount of any PPP loan is subject to 
forgiveness so long as the proceeds are used for eligible expenses. 
32. 
Under the Economic Aid Act, a PPP borrower is entitled to a second draw under 
narrower conditions than its first draw. For example, a second draw borrower must have 300 or 
fewer employees, must demonstrate that it sustained a certain percentage reduction in its gross 
receipts compared to 2019, and must have used its entire first draw proceeds prior to 
disbursement of its second draw proceeds. Second draw loans -- like first draw loans -- are also 
subject to forgiveness. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 6 of 61

7 
 
33. 
Given the anticipated volume of PPP loan applications, Congress provided for 
PPP loan processing and funding through private lenders, with the SBA paying these lenders a 
fee for each processed PPP loan. 
34. 
For their participation, the PPP originally provided that lenders would receive fees 
at a rate of five percent for loans $350,000.00 or less, three percent for loans between 
$350,000.00 and $2,000,000.00, and one percent for loans over $2,000,000.00. See SBA 
Procedural Notice, Control No. 5000-20091 (Feb. 8, 2021), available at 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/Procedural%20Notice%205000-20091%20- 
%202nd%20Updated%20PPP%20Processing%20Fee%20and%201502%20Reporting-508.pdf 
 
(last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
 
35. 
To address institutional lenders’ neglecting of PPP loan applications from many 
small businesses -- especially minority, underserved, veteran, and women-owned businesses -- in 
favor of larger PPP loans, the Economic Aid Act added that lenders processing loans of up to 
$50,000.00 would receive an increased fee of fifty percent or $2,500.00, whichever is less, per 
PPP loan beginning December 27, 2020. 
36. 
As the vast majority of PPP loans -- even those to the smallest businesses and sole 
proprietors -- exceeded $5,000.00, PPP lenders received a flat fee of $2,500.00 for virtually 
every PPP loan less than $50,000.00. 
37. 
On February 8, 2021, the SBA issued a new notice setting forth the procedure for 
how lenders would be paid PPP loan fees by the SBA.  Id.  To apply for a PPP loan, a 
prospective borrower would have to submit a standardized Borrower Application Form issued by 
the SBA (SBA Form 2483 for first time borrowers, and SBA Form 2483-SD for second draw 
borrowers), together with relevant payroll documentation, to a lender. Once the lender reviewed 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 7 of 61

8 
 
and approved the loan application, the lender would submit the application to the SBA for 
approval. 
38. 
Following SBA approval of an application, the SBA would issue a ten-digit loan 
identification number (known as a “GP [General Program] number”) for the borrower’s loan. 
39. 
Provided that the borrower had executed the loan documents, the lender was 
required to disburse the PPP funds within ten days of SBA approval and assignment of the loan 
number. 
40. 
If the PPP borrower did not sign and submit all of the required documents to the 
lender, then the PPP lender was required to report the loan and corresponding loan number as 
cancelled no later than twenty days from the SBA approval and assignment of the loan number. 
41. 
Lenders’ compliance with the above PPP funding requirement was of paramount 
importance to applicants and borrowers for reasons beyond their need to get the PPP loan 
proceeds in a timely manner. 
42. 
Once the SBA approved a PPP loan and assigned it a loan number, the applicant 
could not apply for a PPP loan with any other lender because the applicant could not make all of 
the required certifications on another PPP loan application. Thus, once approved, the borrower 
was essentially “stuck” with the lender to whom it applied for the PPP loan, meaning that the 
borrower had to rely exclusively on the good faith of the lender to actually fund the loan. 
43. 
For both first draw and second draw PPP loans, a PPP loan applicant had to 
certify that they had not and would not receive another first draw or second draw loan, 
respectively. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 8 of 61

9 
 
44. 
Since the lender’s obligation to fund a PPP loan ran from the date the SBA 
approved and assigned a loan number, an applicant could not certify to another lender that they 
would not receive the first loan even if the first lender had failed to timely fund the loan. 
45. 
Once a PPP loan was funded, the lender had ten days to submit an SBA Form 
1502 to report to the SBA that the loan proceeds had been disbursed.  
46. 
After the lender submitted a Form 1502 reporting the PPP loan proceeds as 
disbursed, the SBA would initiate payment of the processing fee to the lender. 
47. 
By submitting a Form 1502, the lender represented to the SBA that the PPP loan 
had been fully funded. Further, a lender was required to update the SBA with monthly Form 
1502 reports detailing each PPP loan’s status. 
Background Concerning Defendant Prestamos 
 
48. 
According to its website, Prestamos purports to be “your partner in economic 
development, small business growth and quality job creation.” See Prestamos CDFI, available at  
https://www.prestamosloans.org/ (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). Also, according to its website, 
Prestamos provides loan products and consulting services that “are designed for the emerging 
business owner seeking funding.” Id. 
49. 
Prestamos is a Community Development Financial Institution (“CDFI”). CDFIs 
were established as part of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement 
Act of 1994. See What Are CDFIs, available at 
https://www.cdfifund.gov/sites/cdfi/files/documents/cdfi_infographic_v08a.pdf (last accessed 
Sept. 17, 2021). There are reportedly 1,000 CDFIs operating nationwide. Id. 
50. 
Prestamos is owned by Chicanos Por La Causa Inc. (“CPLC”). CPLC is a 
corporation organized under Arizona law with its headquarters at 1112 E. Buckeye Road, 
Phoenix, Arizona 85034.   
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 9 of 61

10 
 
51. 
Prestamos represents on its website that, as a CDFI, it is “dedicated to helping 
economic growth in underserved areas by providing financing solutions to businesses and 
economic development projects.” See Prestamos CDFI, available at  
https://www.prestamosloans.org/ (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
52. 
Since many sole proprietors’ PPP loans were in amounts less than $10,000.00, 
PPP lenders like Prestamos were generating processing fees of only several hundred dollars for 
making those loans in 2020. 
53. 
Pursuant to the new 2021 increased fee schedule, however, lenders like Prestamos 
could count on collecting a $2,500.00 flat fee for nearly every PPP loan less than $50,000.00. 
54. 
Taking into consideration the incredible demand for PPP loans less than 
$50,000.00 by sole proprietors, independent contractors, self-employed individuals and other 
underserved small businesses together with the more lucrative fee schedule, Prestamos saw an 
opportunity to obtain enormous amounts of lender fees by booking a high volume of PPP loans 
under $50,000.00. 
55. 
Prestamos reportedly contracted with Blue Acorn PPP, LLC (and/or its affiliate 
FinCap, Inc. or their affiliates) (“Blueacorn”) in 2021 to help identify borrowers to whom 
Prestamos could make PPP loans and assist in the PPP paperwork process. 
56. 
Blueacorn was created in 2020. 
57. 
Blueacorn is neither a bank nor a lender and, therefore, cannot actually make PPP 
loans. 
58. 
In general, only SBA section 7(a)-approved lenders were approved to make PPP 
loans, together with any additional lenders determined by the Administrator of the SBA and the 
Secretary of the U.S. Treasury to also be qualified to make such loans. See 86 Fed. Reg. 3692 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 10 of 61

11 
 
(Jan. 14, 2021), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/14/2021-
00451/business-loan-program-temporary-changes-paycheck-protection-program-as-amended-by-
economic-aid-act (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
59. 
Accordingly, Plaintiffs and other similarly situated class member borrowers 
contracted with Prestamos as the lender obligated to make the PPP loans. 
60. 
For its role in identifying potential borrowers and helping with the PPP 
paperwork, Blueacorn reportedly received a part of the lender’s fees pursuant to a separate 
contractual relationship between the lender and Blueacorn. See THE NEW YORK TIMES, How 
Two Start-Ups Reaped Billions in Fees on Small Business Relief Loans (June 27, 2021), 
available at https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/27/business/ppp-relief-loans-blueacorn- 
womply.html (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
 
61. 
As noted above, Prestamos exploited the increased fees to be paid by the SBA on 
smaller PPP loans in 2021 by reportedly agreeing to fund 494,415 PPP loans totaling over $7.6 
billion in loan proceeds -- more loans than any other lender, and more loans than Bank of 
America, PNC Bank, TD Bank and Wells Fargo combined. See SBA, Paycheck Protection 
Program (PPP) Report, Approvals through 5/31/2021, p. 7, available at  
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/PPP_Report_Public_210531-508.pdf (last 
accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
 
62. 
As a result, Prestamos reportedly generated nearly $1.2 billion in PPP loan fees in 
2021. See THE NEW YORK TIMES, How Two Start-Ups Reaped Billions in Fees on Small 
Business Relief Loans (June 27, 2021), available at 
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/27/business/ppp-relief-loans-blueacorn-womply.html (last 
accessed Sept. 17, 2021) (“Last year, Prestamos made $1.3 million for its lending. This year, it 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 11 of 61

12 
 
will collect nearly $1.2 billion, according to a New York Times calculation of lenders’ fees 
based on government data.”). 
Prestamos’s Participation in the  
PPP Liquidity Facility 
 
63. 
To facilitate lending under the SBA’s PPP, the Federal Reserve supplied liquidity 
to Prestamos and other participating financial institutions through term financing to be secured 
by the PPP loans.  See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Paycheck Protection 
Program Liquidity Facility (PPPLF), available at  
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/ppplf.htm (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
64. 
In particular, the Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility (“PPPLF”) was 
authorized under § 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act “to facilitate lending by eligible borrowers 
[i.e., PPP lenders] to small businesses under the [PPP]. … Under the Facility, the Federal 
Reserve Banks (‘Reserve Banks’) will lend to eligible borrowers [i.e., PPP lenders] on a non- 
recourse basis, taking PPP Loans as collateral.” See Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity 
Facility Term Sheet, available at 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/files/monetary20210625a1.pdf (last 
accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
 
65. 
Further, “[a]ll lenders that are eligible to originate PPP Loans are eligible to 
borrow under the Facility.” Id. 
66. 
For Prestamos and other qualified CDFI PPP lenders, the lending Federal Reserve 
Bank was the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. Id. 
67. 
Only SBA-guaranteed PPP loans are eligible to serve as collateral for PPPLF 
advances, and the principal amount advanced under the PPPLF was to be equal to the principal 
amount of the PPP loan pledged to secure the extension of credit. Id. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 12 of 61

13 
 
68. 
Prestamos received billions of dollars of advances through the PPPLF as specified 
more fully below. 
69. 
In fact, although the PPP application period ended on May 31, 2021 and the life 
cycle of a PPP loan application should only take a few business days, Prestamos continued to 
receive huge advances through the PPPLF between June 30, 2021 and July 30, 2021, after the 
deadline for processing loan applications. 
70. 
For example, on June 30, 2021 alone, Prestamos received PPPLF cash advances 
of approximately $118,743,226. 
71. 
In particular, according to a report by the Federal Reserve to the U.S. Congress 
dated September 13, 2021 “PPPLF Transaction-specific Disclosures (XLSX),” Prestamos 
received the following specific cash advances from the PPPLF: 
 
Date of Advance 
Amount 
2020-05-15 
$839,761.76 
2020-05-19 
$6,047,880.04 
2020-05-20 
$862,834.00 
2020-05-22 
$1,156,497.62 
2020-05-27 
$416,800.54 
2020-05-29 
$696,356.87 
2020-06-01 
$492,218.22 
2020-06-03 
$244,555.74 
2020-06-04 
$559,762.54 
2020-06-08 
$11,242.95 
2020-06-08 
$559,314.27 
2020-06-08 
$63,848.04 
2020-06-08 
$614,343.47 
2020-06-26 
$177,591.04 
2020-06-26 
$221,991.60 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 13 of 61

14 
 
2020-06-26 
$198,670.00 
2020-06-26 
$285,888.69 
2020-06-26 
$103,249.00 
2020-06-26 
$348,119.55 
2020-06-30 
$210,223.83 
2020-07-01 
$303,478.31 
2020-07-01 
$486,363.72 
2020-07-01 
$829,175.81 
2020-07-07 
$1,639,353.02 
2020-07-09 
$1,070,316.28 
2020-07-14 
$320,769.72 
2020-07-14 
$320,335.47 
2020-07-31 
$598,038.85 
2020-07-31 
$1,585,572.39 
2020-07-31 
$333,622.00 
2020-08-11 
$1,027,167.09 
2020-08-11 
$1,819,532.00 
2020-08-11 
$256,166.50 
2020-09-22 
$1,209,795.10 
2020-09-23 
$47,152.00 
2020-09-23 
$322,815.25 
2020-09-23 
$112,162.00 
2020 Total 
$26,392,965.28 
 
Date of Advance 
Amount 
2021-01-29 
$186,091.00 
2021-02-04 
$2,706,582.04 
2021-02-08 
$2,633,372.65 
2021-02-09 
$2,974,669.86 
2021-02-18 
$3,270,876.03 
2021-02-18 
$1,405,472.00 
2021-02-23 
$2,955,206.00 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 14 of 61

15 
 
Date of Advance 
Amount 
2021-02-26 
$2,975,445.15 
2021-03-10 
$1,137,906.71 
2021-03-10 
$574,411.00 
2021-03-18 
$285,612.00 
2021-03-18 
$1,920,037.00 
2021-03-24 
$1,376,450.00 
2021-03-24 
$1,394,589.00 
2021-04-05 
$2,036,898.00 
2021-04-14 
$1,857,735.83 
2021-04-14 
$1,218,922.00 
2021-04-14 
$2,080,722.00 
2021-04-14 
$549,184.00 
2021-04-19 
$2,781,743.00 
2021-04-27 
$2,385,498.00 
2021-05-05 
$542,247,559.00 
2021-05-07 
$977,283,838.00 
2021-05-11 
$219,875,856.00 
2021-05-12 
$11,638,792.00 
2021-05-12 
$15,011,946.00 
2021-05-12 
$22,711,165.00 
2021-05-14 
$261,721,437.00 
2021-05-14 
$71,807,843.00 
2021-05-14 
$9,724,231.00 
2021-05-14 
$5,800,825.00 
2021-05-14 
$1,394,114.00 
2021-05-14 
$3,236,837.00 
2021-05-17 
$2,820,014.00 
2021-05-17 
$2,000,798.00 
2021-05-18 
$3,013,786.00 
2021-05-18 
$3,094,488.00 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 15 of 61

16 
 
Date of Advance 
Amount 
2021-05-19 
$752,007,807.00 
2021-05-20 
$24,508,694.00 
2021-05-20 
$129,048,483.00 
2021-05-21 
$383,962,452.00 
2021-05-24 
$553,643,404.00 
2021-05-26 
$287,698,867.00 
2021-05-26 
$78,487,436.00 
2021-05-26 
$21,918,317.00 
2021-05-26 
$6,212,247.00 
2021-05-26 
$8,109,147.00 
2021-05-28 
$8,589,635.00 
2021-05-28 
$11,371,049.00 
2021-05-28 
$184,579,114.00 
2021-06-02 
$25,025,683.00 
2021-06-02 
$363,445,193.00 
2021-06-03 
$487,925,246.00 
2021-06-04 
$55,686,186.00 
2021-06-08 
$278,866,006.00 
2021-06-08 
$52,432,880.00 
2021-06-09 
$674,168,631.00 
2021-06-10 
$235,611,832.00 
2021-06-15 
$24,013,181.00 
2021-06-15 
$8,772,946.00 
2021-06-15 
$10,593,069.00 
2021-06-15 
$13,035,119.00 
2021-06-15 
$8,866,293.00 
2021-06-17 
$13,428,841.00 
2021-06-17 
$5,676,633.00 
2021-06-18 
$6,658,965.00 
2021-06-18 
$2,304,017.00 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 16 of 61

17 
 
Date of Advance 
Amount 
2021-06-18 
$2,397,599.00 
2021-06-18 
$6,799,943.00 
2021-06-18 
$4,549,067.00 
2021-06-21 
$11,740,892.00 
2021-06-22 
$5,148,262.00 
2021-06-24 
$2,473,148.00 
2021-06-24 
$2,672,552.00 
2021-06-24 
$12,965,069.00 
2021-06-24 
$41,186,983.00 
2021-06-24 
$16,493,297.00 
2021-06-30 
$7,453,648.00 
2021-06-30 
$110,650,628.00 
2021-06-30 
$638,950.00 
2021-07-02 
$41,664.00 
2021-07-02 
$435,987.00 
2021-07-02 
$540,429.00 
2021-07-07 
$329,417.00 
2021-07-07 
$62,496.00 
2021-07-12 
$149,699.00 
2021-07-12 
$176,781.00 
2021-07-14 
$7,871,678.00 
2021-07-29 
$20,832.00 
2021-07-30 
$598,787.00 
2021 Total 
$7,144,136,133.27 
 
 
See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity 
Facility (PPPLF), available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/ppplf.htm (last 
accessed Sept. 17, 2021)  
 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 17 of 61

18 
 
72. 
As alleged below, while Prestamos received over $7.1 billion from the PPPLF in 
2021 alone, Prestamos unjustifiably failed to disburse PPP loan funds approved by the SBA to 
Plaintiffs and numerous other SBA-approved borrower members of the proposed class.  
73. 
Prestamos failed to disburse the proceeds of class member approved loans despite 
having actually received the unfunded PPP loan proceeds from the PPPLF and other sources.   
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund  
Plaintiff Marshall’s PPP Loan 
 
74. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Marshall was, and continues to 
be, in the business of providing in-home healthcare in the Sacramento, California area. 
75. 
Due to the pandemic, Marshall was not able to provide in-home care with the 
same frequency and, as a result, lost significant income. 
76. 
On or about April 21, 2021, Marshall applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos. 
Marshall submitted all requested documentation and information, including but not limited to the 
standard form Note and accompanying documents that all class member borrowers similarly 
submitted to Prestamos.  
77. 
Plaintiff Marshall and class members formed binding and enforceable agreements 
with Prestamos when they completed and submitted the Note and other applicable accompanying 
documents to Prestamos. 
78. 
In particular, the Note also included an Additional and Correction Documents 
Agreement (Errors and Omissions Agreement) (the “Additional Agreement”) between Prestamos 
and plaintiff Marshall; a Business Purpose Statement; a Notice - No Oral Agreements bearing the 
signature of Prestamos’s President Jose Martinez (“Martinez”) and plaintiff Marshall; a Written 
Consent of Governing Body form for Marshall to represent that she is authorized to receive the 
loan and on which Prestamos may rely; an IRS W-9 Request for Taxpayer Identification Number 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 18 of 61

19 
 
and Certification; and an Information and Bank Account Certification and Authorization form 
identifying the bank or other account to which Prestamos would send the funds (collectively, the 
“Loan Documents”). 
79. 
On or about April 22, 2021, the SBA approved Marshall’s PPP loan application 
and assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 8282208801). 
80. 
Marshall was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $7,915.00. 
81. 
The Note identified the SBA loan number and amount, defendant Prestamos as 
the lender and plaintiff Marshall as the borrower; set forth payment terms, potential events of 
default, Prestamos’s rights in the event of default, and other terms and conditions; and provided 
the terms for plaintiff Marshall to repay the loan to Prestamos if it was not forgiven, among other 
things. 
82. 
On April 29, 2021, Marshall signed and returned the Loan Documents in order to 
obtain the $7,915.00 PPP loan. 
83. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents and multiple additional attempts to obtain the loan proceeds, Marshall never received 
the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan. 
84. 
Marshall also took additional steps to obtain her SBA-approved loan.  For 
example, on August 2, 2021, Marshall contacted her local SBA office about Prestamos’s failure 
to fund her PPP loan. 
85. 
Similarly, on August 3, 2021, Marshall emailed the SBA to again pursue funding 
of her PPP loan. 
86. 
On August 3, 2021, the SBA office responded and provided Marshall with the 
following information about her PPP loan: 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 19 of 61

20 
 
Alicia Marshall West Sacramento CA Amount $7,915 Status Disbursed Current 
Loan 82822088-01 
App 29343623 
Funded 04/22/2021[.] 
87. 
Marshall also continued her attempts to collect the PPP loan proceeds directly 
with Prestamos.  For example, on September 4, 2021, Marshall emailed Prestamos’s President 
Martinez stating that “I was SBA approved on April 22nd 2021 and I signed a promissory note 
with you on April 29th 2021”; that “I understand there is a lot of fraud going on but my business 
is legitimate”; that “I don’t understand why my loan was approved money was sent and now its 
cancelled”; that “I would appreciate if you can explain this to me or look into it and see what 
went wrong”; and that “I would hope that you being president of a rapidly growing respected 
business would not want any of your customers to have a negative experience dealing with your 
company so I have faith that you will be able to resolve this issue promptly!” 
88. 
Although the SBA’s records reported that plaintiff Marshall’s PPP loan had 
actually been funded, Marshall never received any PPP loan proceeds despite her repeated 
attempts to actually get funded. 
89. 
The SBA’s record of the alleged disbursement of Marshall’s loan proceeds was 
presumably based on data Prestamos provided to the SBA. 
90. 
Thus, while Prestamos agreed to extend credit to Marshall by identifying itself as 
her lender in the Note -- that is, fund her SBA-approved loan -- Prestamos never actually 
extended credit to Marshall because it failed to fund her PPP loan. 
91. 
In fact, on September 21, 2021, the SBA sent an email to plaintiff Marshall 
stating that she is eligible to apply “for PPP Direct Forgiveness because your lender has opted in 
and you have a PPP loan amount of $150,000 or less.” 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 20 of 61

21 
 
92. 
Despite the SBA’s September 21, 2021 email inviting plaintiff Marshall to apply 
for loan forgiveness and Marshall’s repeated attempts to get funding, however, plaintiff Marshall 
never received any PPP loan proceeds. 
93. 
Having properly completed and returned all required Loan Documents, plaintiff 
Marshall and all class members were entitled to timely disbursement of their PPP loan funds.   
94. 
Having not timely disbursed plaintiff Marshall’s and other class members’ PPP 
loan funds, Prestamos was obligated to timely and properly cancel their PPP loan requests. 
95. 
Prestamos has neither disbursed PPP loan funds to plaintiff Marshall and the 
members of the class nor canceled their loan requests. 
96. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund the loan requests of plaintiff Marshall and the class or 
timely cancel them after failing to properly fund the loans also prevented plaintiff Marshall and 
the members of the class from pursuing their loan requests with another PPP lender. 
97. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Marshall’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived 
Marshall of funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of her in-home healthcare 
business and resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
98. 
Prestamos’s failure to disburse PPP loan funds to plaintiff Marshall and the 
members of the class after agreeing to do so, has left plaintiff Marshall and the class members 
potentially obligated by way of the parties’ contractual agreements set forth in the Loan 
Documents to repay funds they never received. 
99. 
Plaintiff Marshall and other members of the class have also been injured in that 
the loan forgiveness requires affirming, under threat of criminal penalty, that PPP loan funds 
were used in a particular manner and plaintiff Marshall and other members of the class cannot 
affirm the nature of the use of funds they never received. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 21 of 61

22 
 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund  
Plaintiff Pronsky’s PPP Loan 
 
100. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Pronsky was, and continues to be, 
in the barbeque catering business in the Reading, Pennsylvania area. 
101. 
Plaintiff Pronsky was, and is, in the business of operating a barbeque catering 
business in and around Reading, Pennsylvania. 
102. 
Due to the pandemic, Pronsky’s catering business lost significant income. 
103. 
Accordingly, in or about May 2021, Pronsky also applied for a PPP loan. 
104. 
On May 27, 2021, the SBA approved Pronsky’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 4628549010). 
105. 
Pronsky was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $8,332.00. 
106. 
Also on May 27, 2021, Pronsky received the same form PPP loan promissory 
Note and accompanying additional Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had also received. 
107. 
Additionally, on May 27, 2021, Pronsky signed and returned the Loan Documents 
in order to obtain the $8,332.00 PPP loan. 
108. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Pronsky never received the proceeds of his SBA-approved PPP loan.   
109. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Pronsky’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived Pronsky 
of funds that would have assisted in the operation of his catering business and resulted in lost 
opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 22 of 61

23 
 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund  
Plaintiff Townsend’s PPP Loan 
 
110. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Townsend was, and continues to 
be, in the business of making and selling hair care products in the San Bernadino, California 
area. 
111. 
Due to the pandemic, Townsend’s hair care business lost significant income. 
112. 
Accordingly, on or about May 6, 2021, Townsend applied for a PPP loan. 
113. 
Also in May 2021, the SBA approved Townsend’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 4476579008). 
114. 
Townsend was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $20,012.00. 
115. 
On or about May 27, 2021, Townsend received the same form PPP loan 
promissory Note and accompanying additional Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had also 
received. 
116. 
Additionally, on May 27, 2021, Townsend signed and returned the Loan 
Documents in order to obtain the $20,012.00 PPP loan. 
117. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Townsend never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan.   
118. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Townsend’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived 
Townsend of funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of her hair care products 
business and resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund  
Plaintiff Holland’s PPP Loan 
 
119. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Holland was, and continues to be, 
in the real estate business in the Greenwich, Connecticut area. 
120. 
Due to the pandemic, Holland’s real estate business lost significant income. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 23 of 61

24 
 
121. 
In or about May 2021, Holland applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  Holland 
submitted all requested documentation and information. 
122. 
Also in May 2021, the SBA approved Holland’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 1427199001). 
123. 
Holland was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $20,832.00. 
124. 
On May 19, 2021, Holland received the same form PPP loan promissory Note and 
accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
125. 
Also on May 19, 2021, Holland signed and returned the Loan Documents in order 
to obtain the $20,832.00 PPP loan. 
126. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Holland never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan. 
127. 
Prestamos failed to fund the loan despite additional steps by Holland to obtain the 
PPP loan proceeds.  For example, Holland wrote an email to Prestamos’s President Martinez on 
August 13, 2021 stating that “I applied in May, was approved and signed the promissory note 19 
May”; that “[t]he SBA website shows my funds disbursed as of May”; and that “I am writing to 
you to request your assistance in this matter.”  Neither Prestamos nor Martinez responded to 
Holland’s August 13 email. 
128. 
Holland also sought the assistance of the SBA to obtain funding, and the SBA, in 
turn, similarly requested the assistance of Prestamos and its President Martinez.  Specifically, 
according to a September 20, 2021 email from SBA employee John Xu to Martinez: 
“Subject: Nancilee Realty Greenwich CT 
 
Hi Jose, 
 
Ms. Holland contacted SBA regarding her PPP.  She stated that the 
application was approved but she did not receive the funds. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 24 of 61

25 
 
 
I found your name under her loan application, and the funds were 
disbursed currently in our system as follows. 
 
Can you or your staff look into the case and get it back to her? 
 
Nancilee Realty 
Greenwich CT 
Amount $20,832 
Status Disbursed Client 
Loan 14271990-01 
App 30585546 
Funded 05/13/2021.” 
 
129. 
Holland still did not receive any response from Prestamos or Martinez in response 
to her inquiries. 
130. 
On October 1, 2021 -- the very day this lawsuit was filed -- Holland faxed a letter 
to Martinez stating as follows:   
“1 October, 2021 
 
VIA FACSIMILE TO 602-[ Fax no. omitted] 
 
 
JOSE MARTINEZ 
PRESTAMOS CDFI LLC 
1024 E. Buckeye Rd #270 
Phoenix, AZ 85034 
 
RE: SBA Loan No. 1427199001 
 
Mr. Martinez: 
 
As evidenced by the attached documents, I was approved by the SBA for a 
PPP loan in May, 2020.  Due to the issues outlined in the email send [sic] 
to you in August, I have still not received my funds.  The SBA records 
show this payment was disbursed in May. 
 
I have not received a response from you to my email of August 13th.  Nor 
have you responded to the emails from Mr. Xu of the SBA.  Kindly 
provide the courtesy of a response.  I can be reached at [tel. no. omitted]. 
 
Nancilee Holland” 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 25 of 61

26 
 
 
131. 
Despite Holland’s multiple additional attempts to obtain the loan proceeds, 
Prestamos failed to fund Holland’s SBA-approved PPP loan. 
132. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Holland’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived Holland 
of funds that would have assisted in the operation of her real estate brokerage business and 
resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Owsley’s PPP Loan 
 
133. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Owsley was, and continues to be, 
in the construction business in the El Dorado Springs, Missouri area. 
134. 
Due to the pandemic, Owsley’s construction business lost significant income. 
135. 
In or about May 2021, Owsley applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  Owsley 
submitted all requested documentation and information. 
136. 
Also in May 2021, the SBA approved Owsley’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 4680379004). 
137. 
Owsley was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $6,250.00. 
138. 
On or about May 27, 2021, Owsley received the same form PPP loan promissory 
Note and accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
139. 
On May 27, 2021, Owsley signed and returned the Loan Documents in order to 
obtain the $6,250.00 PPP loan. 
140. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Owsley never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 26 of 61

27 
 
141. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Owsley’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived Owsley 
of funds that would have assisted in the operation of her construction business and resulted in 
lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Ahmadou’s PPP Loan 
 
142. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Ahmadou was, and continues to 
be, in the home healthcare business in the Evanston, Illinois area. 
143. 
Due to the pandemic, Ahmadou’s construction business lost significant income. 
144. 
In or about May 2021, Ahmadou applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  
Ahmadou submitted all requested documentation and information. 
145. 
Also in May 2021, the SBA approved Ahmadou’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 8166799007). 
146. 
Ahmadou was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $20,832.00. 
147. 
In May 2021, Ahmadou received the same form PPP loan promissory Note and 
accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
148. 
Also in May 2021, Ahmadou signed and returned the Loan Documents in order to 
obtain the $20,832.00 PPP loan. 
149. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Ahmadou never received the proceeds of his SBA-approved PPP loan. 
150. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Ahmadou’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived 
Ahmadou of funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of his home healthcare 
business and resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 27 of 61

28 
 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Dervin’s PPP Loan 
 
151. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Dervin was, and continues to be, 
in the janitorial business in the Lynwood, Washington area. 
152. 
Due to the pandemic, Dervin’s janitorial business lost significant income. 
153. 
In or about May 2021, Dervin applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  Dervin 
submitted all requested documentation and information. 
154. 
On or about May 14, 2021, the SBA approved Dervin’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 1895529005). 
155. 
Dervin was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $8,385.00. 
156. 
On May 19, 2021, Dervin received the same form PPP loan promissory Note and 
accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
157. 
Also on May 19 2021, Dervin signed and returned the Loan Documents in order 
to obtain the $8,385.00 PPP loan. 
158. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Dervin never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan. 
159. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Dervin’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived Dervin of 
funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of her janitorial business and resulted in 
lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Henderson’s PPP Loan 
 
160. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Henderson was, and continues to 
be, in the women’s clothing business in the Macomb, Michigan area. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 28 of 61

29 
 
161. 
Due to the pandemic, Henderson’s women’s clothing business lost significant 
income. 
162. 
In or about April 2021, Henderson applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  
Henderson submitted all requested documentation and information. 
163. 
On or about April 22, 2021, the SBA approved Henderson’s PPP loan application 
and assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 8614908807). 
164. 
Henderson was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $1,875.00. 
165. 
On April 29, 2021, Henderson received the same form PPP loan promissory Note 
and accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
166. 
Also on April 29, 2021, Henderson signed and returned the Loan Documents in 
order to obtain the $1,875.00 PPP loan. 
167. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Henderson never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan. 
168. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Henderson’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived 
Henderson of funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of her clothing business 
and resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Innis’s PPP Loan 
 
169. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Innis was, and continues to be, in 
the carpet and upholstery cleaning business in the Las Vegas, Nevada area. 
170. 
Due to the pandemic, Innis’s carpet and upholstery cleaning business lost 
significant income. 
171. 
In May 2021, Innis applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  Innis submitted all 
requested documentation and information. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 29 of 61

30 
 
172. 
Also in May 2021, the SBA approved Innis’s PPP loan application and assigned it 
a loan number (SBA Loan Number 8207338903). 
173. 
Innis was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $10,625.00. 
174. 
On May 26, 2021, Innis received the same form PPP loan promissory Note and 
accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
175. 
Also on May 26, 2021, Innis signed and returned the Loan Documents in order to 
obtain the $10,625.00 PPP loan. 
176. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Innis never received the proceeds of his SBA-approved PPP loan. 
177. 
Prestamos failed to fund Innis’s PPP loan despite Innis’s repeated additional 
attempts to try to get his SBA-approved PPP loan actually funded.  For example, in an October 1, 
2021 email to Litza Menendez (“Menendez”), Loan Servicing Specialist for Prestamos and its 
parent CPLC, Innis stated as follows: 
“hi so what’s the word!?  I’m getting emails from the SBA now about 
applying for loan forgiveness.  I remember you telling me you will 
probably have to send me a prepaid card.” 
178. 
Further, in another email to Menendez on October 12, 2021, Innis stated as 
follows (emphasis in original): 
“Hello Litza, I’m writing you to give you one more chance to disperse my 
money before I file a lawsuit against you.  The SBA website is 
CURRENT!!!  I just got off the phone with them and was told IT IS 
CURRENT and that my funds are in someone’s BANK ACCOUNT 
THAT ISN’T MINE …… IF YOU THINK IM GOING TO JUST LIE 
DOWN AND LET THIS HAPPEN LIKE EVERYONE ELSE U ARE 
HIGHLY MISTAKEN……. I knew I wasn’t stupid and did my research 
before even contacting you and that your statements were FALSE….. once 
again the SBA website IS CURRENT AND SHOWS ME STILL 
FUNDED AND THAT MONEY IS IN SOMEONES BANK ACCOUNT 
NOT AFFILIATED WITH ME OR BLUE ACORN OR 
PRESTAMOS….. DO THE RIGHT THING[.]” 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 30 of 61

31 
 
179. 
Despite even these additional attempts, Prestamos has failed to fund Innis’s loan. 
180. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Innis’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived Innis of 
funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of his carpet and upholstery cleaning 
business and resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Stalnaker’s PPP Loan 
 
181. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Stalnaker was in the 
homemaker/personal care provider business in the Ravenna, Ohio area, where she continued to 
reside at all applicable times. 
182. 
Due to the pandemic, Stalnaker’s homemaker/personal care provider business lost 
significant income. 
183. 
In or about April 2021, Stalnaker applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos.  
Stalnaker submitted all requested documentation and information. 
184. 
Also in April 2021, the SBA approved Stalnaker’s PPP loan application and 
assigned it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 1641908909). 
185. 
Stalnaker was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $9,052.00. 
186. 
On April 29, 2021, Stalnaker received the same form PPP loan promissory Note 
and accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
187. 
Also on April 29, 2021, Stalnaker signed and returned the Loan Documents in 
order to obtain the $9,052.00 PPP loan. 
188. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Stalnaker never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 31 of 61

32 
 
189. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Stalnaker’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived 
Stalnaker of funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of her homemaker/personal 
care provider business and resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund 
Plaintiff Jones’s PPP Loan 
 
190. 
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, plaintiff Jones was, and continues to be, in 
the delivery service business in the Golden Valley, Arizona area. 
191. 
Due to the pandemic, Jones’s delivery service lost significant income. 
192. 
In or about May 2021, Jones applied for a PPP loan with Prestamos. Jones 
submitted all requested documentation and information. 
193. 
Also in May 2021, the SBA approved Jones’s PPP loan application and assigned 
it a loan number (SBA Loan Number 8899718910). 
194. 
Jones was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $4,130.00. 
195. 
On or about May 30, 2021, Jones received the same form PPP loan promissory 
Note and accompanying Loan Documents that plaintiff Marshall had received. 
196. 
Also on May 30, 2021, Jones signed and returned the Loan Documents in order to 
obtain the $4,130.00 PPP loan. 
197. 
Despite properly and timely completing, signing and submitting the Loan 
Documents, Jones never received the proceeds of her SBA-approved PPP loan.  
198. 
In fact, on October 14, 2021 and again on November 2, 2021, the SBA sent 
emails to plaintiff Jones stating that she is “eligible for PPP Direct Forgiveness because your 
lender has opted in any you have a PPP loan amount of $150,000 OR LESS.” 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 32 of 61

33 
 
199. 
Despite the SBA’s October 14, 2021 and November 2, 2021 emails inviting 
plaintiff Jones to apply for loan forgiveness, plaintiff Jones never received any PPP loan 
proceeds. 
200. 
As Jones summarized in a complaint she filed with the BBB on November 4, 
2021:   
“I filed and was approved for a PPP loan on April 25th 2021for the amount 
of $4130 waited a month started sending emails with no responses besides 
the automated ticket creation and a few emails stating that the support 
email was no longer active then received loan documents on May 26, 2021 
it has been non-stop back and forth with no actual responses or funding 
received and now I’m receiving emails from the SBA to file for 
forgiveness on a loan I never received” 
 
201. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund Jones’s SBA-approved PPP loan deprived Jones of 
funds that would have directly assisted in the operation of her delivery service business and 
resulted in lost opportunities and other consequential damages. 
Prestamos’s Failure to Fund Other  
SBA-Approved Class Member  
Borrower PPP Loans 
 
202. 
Numerous other similarly situated borrowers have been damaged by Prestamos’s 
failure to fund their SBA-approved PPP loans and have complained about their experiences to 
the BBB and via social media sites. 
203. 
For example, the BBB’s website identifies a number of complaints against 
Prestamos:1  
a. 
“I was notified on June 2, 2021 that my loan would be funded by 
Prestamos CDFI, LLC within 3-6 business days. … I have never been 
funded.” (August 2, 2021 post); 
 
 
1  
Emphasis is in the original in this Complaint unless otherwise noted or the context 
otherwise requires. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 33 of 61

34 
 
b. 
“I was approved a PPP loan in May and SBA has [it] that the loan was 
disbursed … in May and I haven’t received a dime, cannot reach anyone 
via phone and all emails take me around in circles.” (July 12, 2021 post); 
 
c. 
“I was later texted approval for funding on 6/3/2021. Since then I have not 
received the funds. When I check online support it says DENIED. I am 
frustrated as to what is going on? I reached out to support online email and 
text but no change in status. When I checked public records online it says 
my name address and funding amount as if I have been funded already. 
Please help!” (July 12, 2021) (emphasis in original); 
 
d. 
“Its been over 25+ business days since date of signing loan docs. … On 
the sba ppp website (capital access financial system) [it says] that my 
funds HAVE been dispersed [sic] by Prestamos CDFI, LLC which isn’t 
true because I definitely don’t have the funds. Since Prestamos CDFI, 
LLC is my lender I hold them responsible.” (July 9, 2021) (emphasis in 
original); 
 
e. 
Prestamos “works with Blueacorn and actually is the lender who signed 
off on the loan that was meant for me for PPP. … They keep saying 
Blueacorn is the company that has your money despite my having entered 
into a contract with Prestamos. They are continuing to accrue interest for 
over a month now that I owe on money I never received.” (July 7, 2021); 
 
f. 
Prestamos “is extremely I mean extremely hard to get in contact with. … 
I’ve called EVERY number on their site and have gotten in contact with 
no one.” (July 6, 2021) (emphasis in original); and 
 
g. 
“I applied for the *** PPP Loan online with BlueAcorn (lender servicing 
provider) in May 2021. *** approved by PPP Loan on May 26, 2021 and 
Prestamos CDFI, LLC is the lender and my loan should have been 
disbursed within 10 days of my *** approval date or 20 days the latest. It 
has been more than 1 month and I have not received my funds. I sent 
multiple emails to Prestamos and also left voicemail messages within the 
past 2 weeks, but Prestamos has not responded at all. My loan status is 
active but not fully disbursed according to the ProPublicas online 
information which claimed to come from ***. I will not be responsible to 
pay back a loan I never received. I have not canceled my loan either and 
need it desperately for my business and to support my 2 sons.” (July 2, 
2021). 
 
See BBB, Prestamos CDFI LLC, available at 
https://www.bbb.org/us/az/phoenix/profile/loans/prestamos-cdfi-llc-1126-
1000084982/complaints (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021). 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 34 of 61

35 
 
204. 
Similarly, according to complaints posted publicly on the Internet: 
a. 
“WHERE IS OUR MONEY!??????? ALL THE OBSTACLES & HOOPS 
SOMEONE NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTABLE SINCE APRIL 
WAITING ON WHAT NOW‼⁉BLUEACORN & PRESTAMOS HAVE 
BROKEN THEIR PROMISES!!!! WE NEED A RESPONSE NOW.” 
(August 8, 2021) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueAcornPrestamos/comments/p1eyr2/where_i  
s_our_money_all_the_obstacles_hoops/; 
b. 
“I’m pissed I signed 5/27 and still nothing no emails no nothing I call 
prestamos they say call blue acorn I call them they say the same shit 
somebody help me before I lose my entire business please!” (July 2, 2021) 
Available at 
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueAcornPrestamos/comments/occrqy/im_piss  
ed_i_signed_527_and_still_nothing_no/; 
c. 
“I GOT EVERYTHING, SIGNED AND WAS WAITING FOR MY 
DISBURSEMENT. LAST NIGHT I RECEIVED AN EMAIL & TEXT 
SAYING THAT MY ID WAS BLURRY AND MY IDENTITY 
NEEDED TO BE VERIFIED. I DID ALL THAT (AFTER OVER A 
HOUR OF CRASHING) JUST TO HAVE MY BA STATUS START 
BACK AT STAGE 1 AND NOW I AM NOT IN FUNDING STATUS 
ANYMORE. I AM BEYOND PISSED. I HAVE BEEN WAITING 
OVER A MONTH.” (DATE) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/Blueacorn/comments/n5dk8y/prestamos_signers 
_427430/; 
d. 
“I was approved 5/26, signed documents 6/2 my lender is Prestamos as 
well. Haven’t heard anything from them & I opted in for the dash card as 
well. Called them to see if my card was shipped I sat on hold for 2 hours 
& they disconnected my call smh.” (June 28, 2021) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/EIDLPPP/comments/o19x77/has_anyone_who_  
signed on 62 been funded through/; 
e. 
“Has anyone who signed on 6/2 been funded through blue acorn? My 
lender is Prestamos and I opted in for the dash card (which I still haven’t 
received). I was approved 5/29 and signed 6/2. I’m getting a bit 
discouraged, but trying to keep the faith. Time are HARD.” (June 16, 
2021) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/EIDLPPP/comments/o19x77/has anyone who   
signed_on_62_been_funded_through/; 
f. 
“BLUEACORN/ JUNE SIGNERS/PRESTAMOS / REJECTED FUNDS/ 
UBI/ OPT FOR DASHCARD Can someone share how long was their 
experience when funds were rejected by your bank. Dave’s banking 
rejected/returned my funds on 06/14 how long before I’ll receive an email 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 35 of 61

36 
 
to opt for dash card. I have chatted, message them on Twitter and put in 
multiple tickets with support still no luck no email just automated 
responses from support and live chat representative just tell me to contact 
support which is a dead end. Will I still get funded or will this process be a 
long experience? Seems like it’s already been a long time I’m just over it 
at this point! Somebody please help.” (July 12, 2021) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/EIDLPPP/comments/oitaff/blueacornjune_signe  
rsprestamosrejected/; 
g. 
“They keep telling us that our funds are guaranteed, to "REST ASSURED, 
YOU WILL BE FUNDED." But, Federal Law states that lenders have 10 
calendar days to fund the loan after the PLP or SBA LOAN NUMBER is 
granted, and AFTER 20 DAYS, THE LOAN WILL BE CANCELED IF 
ALL NECESSARY PAPERWORK IS NOT TURNED IN. Blue Acorn 
and Prestamos have made it impossible to get in touch with them ON 
PURPOSE, bc they do not plan on doing anymore work to fund anyone, 
and they WILL NOT BE REACHING OUT to anyone who is lacking any 
paperwork - paperwork THEY NEVER ASKED FOR IN THE FIRST 
PLACE!! At this point, I think it would be wise to send in everything you 
have (to the SBA? to prestamosinfo@cplc?) that proves you have a 
business that was in operation before 2020, ie. bank statements, w-2s, 
everything. Still, they will avoid funding your loan like the plague. They 
will find some reason for your loan to be denied, even after you have an 
SBA loan #, due to the 20 day cancelation clause in the Interim Rules. WE 
ARE NOT GOING TO BE FUNDED FOLKS, ITS OVER. SERIOUSLY, 
LAWYER UP, BECAUSE THIS IS A VIOLATION OF THE UNFAIR 
AND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT, which pays 3X damages 
(triple damages). These companies are betting on us not being legitimate 
business owners, and not being able to prove that we are, and moreover, 
scared to get the authorities involved.” (June 15, 2021) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/PPPLoans/comments/o0qcxv/blue acorn presta  
mos waiting until 20 days passed/; 
h. 
“So she created a ticket and said she couldnt tell me what the error was 
until they reached out to me. Not sure if I need to verify questions like 
everyone has been talking about and I got lucky to ask them now or else I 
would never come across it because they wont tell you or email you about 
it. Or there really is an error which I guess I will find out till they tell me.” 
(May 5, 2021) Available at  
https://www.reddit.com/r/PPPLoans/comments/n3x0zj/blueacorn_if_you_  
got_your_loan_from_prestamos/; and 
i. 
“Had the same error issue had to resend my ID as well as answer 
verification questions, originally signed on the evening of the 28th, my 
issue is the never reached out me about it I had to reach out and ask them, 
hopefully that all I need to do೦೦೦೦” (May 5, 2021) Available at 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 36 of 61

37 
 
https://www.reddit.com/r/PPPLoans/comments/n3x0zj/blueacorn if you   
got_your_loan_from_prestamos/. 
 
j. 
Cody Brooks  
 
 
 
 
November 6, 2021 
“Approved, funds disbursed, prestamos and blueacorn said they weren’t 
able to approve me, federalpaygo site shows this ppp loans been disbursed 
to me but haven’t received anything and the only thing that was on my 
mind was how shi**y it’d be to not only never receive the funds but to 
have to pay it back as well along with interest so I did how I felt best after 
Prestamos underwriter said I have a an email confirming I don’t have 
responsibility for the funds and went ahead and applied for the forgiveness 
… prestamos accepted it and sent it off to the sba which was fully remitted 
by the sba. Can’t apply for forgiveness unless u were approved and funds 
were disbursed.. I’ve tried speaking with blueacorn and Prestamos several 
times stating I have all the documentation needed for this from the 
beginning to the promissory note to “disbursement and forgiveness” they 
haven’t replied back anything but forward what I’ve sent them back to me. 
Literally took out a loan from some close friends and family in the amount 
of the ppp loan to cover payroll and expenses and still haven’t received 
anything yet when I was suppose to have it in May 2021.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
k. 
Kirt McReynolds 
 
 
 
 
November 2, 2021 
“Funds sent back to prestamos and haven’t recieved a dime since.. 
approved in May” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
l. 
Judy Padilla 
 
 
 
 
 
October 31, 2021  
“I was funded and my bank returned it it’s been funded since June 14 but I 
still don’t have it” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
m. 
Nikki Dailey  
 
 
 
 
October 30, 2021 
“I was also approved by Prestamos CDFI, then denied and never received 
funds and SBA is requesting that I apply for forgiveness. They 
continuously made up fictitious information regarding the inability to fund 
my loan need to join this class action law suit” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 37 of 61

38 
 
 
n. 
Anthonia Johnson 
 
 
 
 
October 27, 2021 
“Was approved by prestmos than denied never funded now being asked to 
apply for loan forgiveness on a loan I never got” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
o. 
Susan Hart 
 
 
 
 
 
October 28, 2021 
“Please include me , was approved and never funded and have even be 
approved for forgiveness.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
p. 
Kristin Dailey  
 
 
 
October 27, 2021 
“Stole my loan my business is about to bankrupt as well how do I add 
myself to the class action law suit prestamos cdfi had me sign for loan but 
didn’t give it to me” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
q. 
Danny Shields  
 
 
 
October 21, 2021 
“I am actually about to be interviewed next week for a follow up piece to 
BlueAcorn/Prestamos PPP loan article that I read that infuriated me so 
much I reached out to the reporter and she is doing a follow up article 
based on the massive number of us who were swindled by these 
organizations. I too had my signed and approved loan w/ Prestamos and 
had my money returned after I was approved and that was keystone issue 
that probably links each and everyone of us, the money got returned. Than 
instead of standing by Blueacorns whole oh if you are SBA approved, 
your funds are earmarked and set aside for you, that was not the case. I 
had an assistant of my states SBA representative call me one afternoon 
and in a profanity laced provision of facts, advised me of the whole 
situation and how they simply moved beyond those unfortunate enough to 
have funds returned and continued funding as many as they could. 
Hopefully that is the case and they didnt just simply steal the money. But 
either way, I am owed money and I have been waiting and aching for this 
process of a class action to start, ever since I was blatantly professing to 
Blueacorn and Prestamos that it was coming and when I was trying to 
spread awareness on Reddit to those naive enough to think this wasnt the 
case. Now I see they recently just had mass denials for all those who 
continued to submit tickets wondering where their approved loan was in 
this shady process. It’s disgusting. I need what I am owed and much more 
for the mental anguish and the fact that this was a company federally 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 38 of 61

39 
 
backed and advocated who not only didnt do what they claimed but did it 
to a certain segment of the populace that at the time were specifically 
being targeted to receive this assistant and everyone else was cut off since 
their was such a dire need for it amongst the lower classes. All these other 
fraudsters and unscrupulous individuals were having a free for all in being 
allowed to abuse this program, and when I legitimately provided all 
approved and required documentation, I get the third degree and am 
denied after having been approved by Blueacorn, a company that 
perpetrated fraud outright initially, and now say they are denying me after 
doing a secondary review, a review that was done by the SBA and 
approved and not within their purview to even attempt. Hopefully this 
lawsuit goes after Blueacorn just as much as Prestamos, because you 
couldnt even reach Prestamos. Only lender I’ve ever heard of that defers 
to the middleman for all servicing, questions or funding after they signed a 
contract between myself them and the SBA. Ridiculous. So glad this is 
coming to the light because their are hundreds of questions that I demand 
be answered!” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
r. 
Shannon Black 
 
 
 
 
October 19, 2021 
“Please include me as well. I too was approved a loan from Prestomos and 
still haven’t received payment. SBA sent me an email informing me that I 
can now apply for forgiveness on the loan I never received. According to 
their records loan was dispersed 6/2/21. I am deviated to learn that the 
lender has done this to hundreds of thousands of struggling Americans and 
their families fraudulently using this crisis to steal from the ones who need 
it the most and the U.S. Government whom intended funds to quickly 
reach businesses in greatest need.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
s. 
Candace Cook  
 
 
 
October 18, 2021 
“I had prestamos as a lender too and they never funded my ppp loan 
although I was approved” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
t. 
Angela Joya  
 
 
 
 
October 16, 2021 
“Yes please add me” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 39 of 61

40 
 
 
u. 
Dustin Estep  
 
 
 
 
November 22, 2021 
“This is the same exact thing that Happened to me. It was May when 
approved and disbursed. As of today im still showing on the sba website 
as fully dusbursed and current” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
v. 
Kimberly 
 
 
 
 
 
November 13, 2021 
“I filed a complaint back in April when I signed paper work for funding 
they sent to my account but then withdrew it some how saying payment 
ledger and I was told they would send me a prepaid card and it never came 
and when I tried to speak to some one they wanted my tax return again 
and then told me I wasn’t approved but it says I received it and I looked at 
my paper work and it has another receiptiant named Jose [M]artinez and I 
have absolutely no idea who that is I tried to get help from the SBA they 
told me that I had to get ahold of the lender and that is impossible” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
w. 
Jacqueline Smith 
 
 
 
 
November 12, 2021 
“I was approved and given an SBA number on May 20th 2021. My bank 
rejected my funds on June 3rd 2021. On August 30th I opted for the dash 
prepaid card and I’m still waiting. I have filed several tickets with blue 
acorn I have contacted the SBA twice and they have noted and it escalated 
my account. And here it is now November 12th and I am still waiting I 
just keep getting told to be patient.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
x. 
Jessica Moore  
 
 
 
November 11, 2021 
“I was approved and received a SBA loan number may 31st 2021 but 
never recieved a dime. After months of trying to get my money they 
randomly sent me an ensul stating I was now denied and stated nothing 
else, even though I was already approved and funds had already been sent 
but supposedly my bank sent them back and all I needed to do was update 
new banking info but this took them 2 months but instead of resending to 
my new bank info they said I was denied but to this day I still have an 
SBA approved loan number and SBA still shows my loan was disbursed to 
me yet I havent seen a dime. Nobody will get back to me from either blue 
acorn, Prestamos or SBA yet I get continuous emails about being 
approved for loan forgiveness on a loan I never got. This is ridiculous. 
Someone help!” 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 40 of 61

41 
 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
y. 
Jessica Moore  
 
 
 
December 1, 2021 
“Oh and up to date now. Prestamos approved my loan forgiveness and 
SBA processed it and paid them for a loan I NEVER RECEIVED! I 
contacted them and told them if I was denied after being given an SBA 
loan number and money being sent to me then returned to lender then why 
did the lender approve my forgiveness for a loan they never paid me and 
then the SBA approved it and sent the lender the money for my loan that I 
NEVER RECIEVED?!?! This is absolutely insane! Idk what to do now. 
I’ve been approved and forgiven for a loan i haven’t seen a dime of ??!?” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
Jacqueline Schementi  
 
 
November 10, 2021 
“Yes. Same scenario here, but with different lender. Called SBA who said 
I was fine and should have gotten the disbursement. Even set up in SBA 
system” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
z. 
Asia Adoibrahim 
 
 
 
 
November 8, 2021 
“Yes I’ll was approve thru blue acorns was suppose[d] to be funded by 
prestamos they told me to reverify I did. Then they just put me on hold 
could reach any one. Just email …told me. Their working hard to. Get me 
my funds and that the loan were sent back ! my bank has no log of that 
actually happening. Then they. Basically blocked me from the site all SBA 
sites and. Or .gov sites say funded. I applied for forgiveness I was 
approved. How is that possible That means the funds were supplied and I 
never got anything. And I emails saying all of this. And me looking for the 
location of the loan. Which in long. Drawn out. Ordeal they then stated 
that they. We’re now denying such loan. For technical reasons or 
something yet u approved forgiveness I want answers” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
aa. 
Melissa Estores 
 
 
 
 
November 9, 2021 
“My experience was almost identical to yours. The livelihood of my 
business was balancing in the hands of BlueAcorn and Prestamos. 
Between BlueAcorn and the automated responses to the “tickets” made 
and Prestamos and their phone tag, I wasted valuable time. Time that I 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 41 of 61

42 
 
cannot reverse. Time that I should have been able to seek financial help 
elsewhere. Shame on you Prestamos for victimizing the community that 
you claim to support. Your business has probably been the downfall of 
countless other small businesses that fell victim to your service. I hope 
you can sleep at night knowing the damage you caused us all. Worst yet, 
you were a trusted finance company that didn’t come with a fraud warning 
label!!” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
bb. 
Jamie Dean Jones 
 
 
 
 
November 4, 2021 
“I never received my funds either and I am now getting emails about 
forgiveness on a loan I never received and I’m in Arizona what do I do?” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
cc. 
Christine Allen 
 
 
 
 
November 4, 2021 
“i was approved also for PPP and Prestomos says they issued my check 
recieved 6/1/2021 and i still havent gotten the money.Please add me to 
list” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
dd. 
David Raymond Butts 
 
 
November 4, 2021 
“I was also short changed out of my loan which was approved by the 
SBA. Signed on May 27th and still no funds” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
ee. 
Teresa Fernandez 
 
 
 
 
December 12, 2021 
“I never got my loan and it was approved and dispersed 6 months ago I 
lost everything even hope I would ever see this money lets see what 
happens” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
ff. 
Terry  
 
 
 
 
 
December 10, 2021 
“I recieved my funds from my ppp loan then Prestamos removed it via ach 
from my account. And when I called them they claim no record of 
removing it. My bank gave me the ach tracking number showing it 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 42 of 61

43 
 
returned and the sba sent me a letter saying my forgiveness was approved 
and I never applied for forgiveness” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
gg. 
Dawn Fullerton 
 
 
 
 
December 7, 2021 
“They never sent my money but it was approved and also was forgiven by 
SBA so they pocketed the whole 20K” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
hh. 
Robert Ventullo 
 
 
 
 
December 6, 2021 
“I just realized thought I need help and if anyone handles this please 
contact me” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
ii. 
Curtis Samuel  
 
 
 
December 6, 2021 
“I need answer to why I can’t get my money blue acorn can not be 
trusted” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
jj. 
Cory Patterson 
 
 
 
December 6, 2021 
“They need to come off with my funds I was approved and the sba funded 
but iced seen nothing” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
kk. 
Frankie Johnson 
 
 
 
 
December 5, 2021 
“Applied for and was approved granted an SBA loan number but never 
received anything.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
ll. 
Erica Page 
 
 
 
 
 
December 6, 2021 
“Approved for the ppp on the loan list but never received” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 43 of 61

44 
 
 
mm. 
Shelby Edwards 
 
 
 
 
December 2, 2021 
“Applied for, was approved, but never received funds. Sba states funds 
were disbursed. Received prepaid card with NO FUNDS TODAY AFTER 
NEARLY 8 months.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
nn. 
Eshontel Davis 
 
 
 
 
December 4, 2021 
“Me also is sickening and people should be held accountable. They just 
keep saying wait its ridiculous. I’ve even begged to just cancel the loan. 
I’ve asked for the legal department everything and I get nothing but rest 
assure.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
oo. 
Amy Channel  
 
 
 
November 29, 2021 
“My name is Amy channell I own a caregiving business, and I filled out 
an application for the ppp loan through blue acorn in April and was 
approved they sent my money to my bank my bank denied it and sent 
them the money back they kept telling me they were going to send my 
money to the right account and to be patient they said it would take 3 to 6 
days. Then on August 11th I got this email ‘We are writing to let you 
know that we have determined that based upon information you provided, 
your application does not meet the requirements for the Paycheck 
Protection Program. 
 
Unfortunately, we will not be able to fund your PPP loan.’ I have been 
waiting since April for these funds because they told me I was approved 
and kept telling me to be patient my funds are set aside and will be funded 
into my account no matter what but they have alot of applications there 
taking care of so to bare with them. I would really like help with what to 
do this has set me back alot now.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
pp. 
Tyree Kelly 
 
 
 
 
 
November 29, 2021 
“I got approved for my PPP load with Blue Acorn in March. Did all the 
paperwork and waited, but emailed them about once a week. After finding 
out they ran out of money, I emailed them again to be told I need to Is 
verify my identity, mind you this is months after me filing. Did they and 
they ended up saying they can’t fund me but had me on the hook the 
whole time.” 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 44 of 61

45 
 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
qq. 
Thomas Carrick 
 
 
 
 
November 28, 2021 
“I was approved through Blue Accorn on 5-20-2021, SBA approved me I 
should say almost 2 weeks went by and did not receive my funds, after 
looking over my paperwork that I had signed, meaning the loan papers and 
promisary note, I noticed that one number in the routing number was 
wrong, it was a nightmare after that, then I got a message from them 
saying that they can not find my loan because I’m not approved, what!? 
LoL, I was already approved and waiting on funding, Prestamos is the 
bank funding the loan, there’s some serious crooked crap going on with all 
this shit!” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
rr. 
Tiffany Abbe  
 
 
 
 
November 24, 2021 
“Blue Acorn- they approved loan I never received funds, SBA website 
shows I was funded and received the money . After 6 months of not 
getting any help or received my loan I turned them into the BBB and they 
wouldn’t reply to them or me and then all of a sudden my loan was denied 
but SBA says I have to pay that money back I can’t even apply for the 
forgiveness part because blue Acorn can’t find me in the system anymore. 
But I have to pay back the amount or I could face jail time ! Is what I was 
told.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
ss. 
Cody Brooks  
 
 
 
 
November 23, 2021 
“On several sites it shows my company has received a loan through 
prestamos cdfi but I have never actually received and funds. I have several 
documents from start to current.” 
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/money/fees/ppp-loans-
exploited-by-community-development-lender-prestamos-lining-pockets-
with-1-2b/ (visited Dec. 14, 2021). 
 
tt. 
“I got approve for my PPP loan in the amount $16,250 By The ** 
Prestamos CDFI is trying to steal my money. Prestamos CDFI, said my 
funds will be sent back to ***, but the *** said no funds are return to them 
at all. I need my funds for my business.” (Oct. 12, 2021 post) 
Prestamos CDFI LLC | Complaints | Better Business Bureau® Profile 
(bbb.org) 
 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 45 of 61

46 
 
uu. 
“My small business was approved by the sba in may in their records my 
loan status is disbursed yet I havent received a dime and the lender 
prestamos refuses to address the issue only referring me back to blueacorn 
whos lying telling me that after review I wasnt approved by the sba so I 
just want the money that i have been approved for.” (Sept. 23, 2021 post) 
Prestamos CDFI LLC | Complaints | Better Business Bureau® Profile 
(bbb.org) 
 
vv. 
“Ive previously been approved for a ppp loan with Prestamos CDFI LLC 
as my lender. This loan appears online on several sites as being disbursed 
from Prestamos CDFI LLC to myself ********************* back in 
May 2021 but the issue is that Ive never received these funds. When 
reaching out to Prestamos CDFI LLC showing several documents and 
screenshots as my valid proof the only response I received was the loan 
through their technology partners organization Blueacorn I stated that 
nothing on my loan documentation shows anything about a Blueacorn but 
does show that Prestamos CDFI LLC is my lender. Ive recently taken out 
a separate business loan in the amount of what my ppp loan was to cover 
business things so I went ahead and applied for the Forgiveness and 
Prestamos accepted it and sent it to the sba. Only way to apply for 
forgiveness is by being approved and funds disbursed. I still havent 
received any of those funds from Prestamos CDFI LLC and theyre lacking 
important communication.” (Sept. 22, 2021 post) 
Prestamos CDFI LLC | Complaints | Better Business Bureau® Profile 
(bbb.org) 
 
ww. 
“I applied for my second PPP loan with XXXX. XXXX farmed this loan 
request along with about XXXX other loans to Prestamos XXXX, XXXX. 
After hurdles, jumping through hoops, I received SBA approval and was 
provided loan documents that were signed and supposedly legally binding. 
Those documents were provided by XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX by way of 
Prestamos to sign. I was advised on XX/XX/XXXX by my bank XXXX, 
that the funds in the amount of {$3200.00} were being returned to 
Prestamos XXXX. I knew this was going to happen and attempted to 
update my bank information prior to the money being returned but was 
denied. Ultimately the money was returned. I immediately attempted to 
reach out to both the lender and the third party XXXX. Prestamos 
completely wiped their hands of the matter. Despite having contractually 
entered into a loan with myself, and then, LYING TO THE 
GOVERNMENT in having public record reflect the above, that I had the 
loan funded and the funds were dispersed to me. The funds that were 
supposed to be designated for me and reissued, as any lender would 
clearly do, are MIA. I have documentation on top of documentation of this 
whole ordeal to demonstrate that despite currently being legally bound to a 
loan that has been accruing interest since XX/XX/XXXX, the lender has 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 46 of 61

47 
 
not once reached out to myself or the SBA to correct the information.” 
(July 30, 2021 consumer complaint excerpt). 
Search the Consumer Complaint Database | Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau (consumerfinance.gov) 
 
205. 
Further, although Prestamos states on its website that it maintains an office in 
Santa Fe, New Mexico (see Prestamos Locations (prestamosloans.org) (visited Dec. 17, 
2021), Plaintiffs were advised that office may not even exist. 
206. 
Plaintiffs are unaware whether Prestamos has retained or has spent or 
disbursed any such funds for any other purpose. Plaintiffs anticipate obtaining further 
information regarding the status of the SBA-approved but unfunded PPP loan proceeds in 
discovery. Further and in any event, Plaintiffs are aware that Prestamos has belatedly sought 
to fund certain class member borrowers following the filing of plaintiffs’ original complaint 
on October 1, 2021, and these borrowers have still incurred lost opportunity and other 
damages to their businesses due to Prestamos’s failure to timely fund their loans. 
Class Action Allegations 
 
207. 
Plaintiffs bring this action individually and on behalf of the following 
National Class and Subclasses (collectively, the “Classes”): 
a. 
National Class: All persons and entities in the United States who, in 
2021, applied for PPP loans with defendant Prestamos as the lender for 
whom the SBA provided an SBA loan number, who executed their Loan 
Documents but did not receive the PPP loan proceeds;  
 
b. 
California Subclass: All persons and entities in California who, in 2021, 
applied for PPP loans with defendant Prestamos as the lender for whom 
the SBA provided an SBA loan number, who executed their Loan 
Documents but did not receive the PPP loan proceeds;  
c. 
Illinois Subclass: All persons and entities in Illinois who, in 2021, applied 
for PPP loans with defendant Prestamos as the lender for whom the SBA 
provided an SBA loan number, who executed their Loan Documents but 
did not receive the PPP loan proceeds; and 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 47 of 61

48 
 
d. 
Ohio Subclass: All persons and entities in Ohio who, in 2021, applied for 
PPP loans with defendant Prestamos as the lender for whom the SBA 
provided an SBA loan number, who executed their Loan Documents but 
did not receive the PPP loan proceeds. 
208. 
Excluded from the Classes are Prestamos, any entities in which Prestamos has a 
controlling interest, Prestamos’ parent company (CPLC), Prestamos’s and CPLC’s agents and 
employees, any Judge to whom this action is assigned, and any member of such Judge’s staff 
and immediate family. 
209. 
There is a well-defined community of interest among members of the Classes, 
and the disposition of their claims in a single action will benefit the parties and the Court. 
210. 
The proposed Classes meet each applicable requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. 
211. 
Numerosity: While the exact number of members of the Classes is unknown 
at this time and can be determined by appropriate discovery, the Classes include hundreds 
or thousands of members such that joinder of all members is impracticable. 
212. 
Ascertainability: Names and addresses of members of the Classes are available 
from defendant Prestamos’s records and potentially other sources including publicly available 
databases. Notice can be provided to the members of the Classes through direct mailing, 
publication, or otherwise using techniques and a form of notice similar to those customarily 
used in class action litigation. 
213. 
Typicality: Plaintiffs’ claims are based on the same facts and legal theories as 
those of the other members of the Classes which Plaintiffs respectively seek to represent. 
Plaintiffs and the members of the Classes all similarly applied for PPP loans, had their loans 
approved by the SBA, but did not receive their PPP loan proceeds from Prestamos. 
214. 
Adequacy: Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the 
members of the Classes. Plaintiffs are adequate representatives of the Classes as their interests 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 48 of 61

49 
 
align with the interests of the members of the Classes, and Plaintiffs are represented by counsel 
skilled and experienced in class actions, including financial consumer and other class action 
litigation. 
215. 
Superiority: A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair 
and efficient adjudication of the claims asserted in this action because the expense and burden 
of individual litigation makes it economically unfeasible for members of the Classes to seek to 
redress their claims other than through a class action; if separate actions were brought by 
individual members of the Classes, the resulting duplicity of lawsuits could lead to differing 
and inconsistent adjudications; and, absent a class action, Prestamos is unlikely to be held 
accountable for its failure to actually fund all applicable SBA-approved PPP loans. 
216. 
Predominance and Commonality: Common questions of law and fact exist 
and predominate over any questions which affect individual members of the Classes. 
Common questions of fact and law include, but are not limited to: 
a. 
whether defendant Prestamos failed to fund SBA-approved PPP loans to 
Plaintiffs and other members of the Classes in breach of its obligations to 
actually fund such loans; 
 
b. 
whether Prestamos obtained fees for PPP loans that it did not make; 
 
c. 
whether Prestamos’s failure to fund SBA-approved PPP loans violated the 
Loan Documents it entered into with Plaintiffs and other members of the 
Classes; 
 
d. 
whether Prestamos’s failure to fund PPP loans constituted unlawful, 
deceptive and/or unfair acts or practices as to the members of the 
California, Illinois and Ohio Subclasses; and 
 
e. 
whether defendant Prestamos’s failure to fund SBA-approved PPP loans 
damaged members of the Classes. 
 
217. 
Plaintiffs reserve the right to amend the definition of the Classes if discovery or 
further investigation reveals that the definition of the Classes should be amended. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 49 of 61

50 
 
COUNT ONE 
 
Breach of Contract 
(On Behalf of All Plaintiffs and the National Class) 
 
218. 
Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations from all previous paragraphs as if fully set 
forth herein. 
219. 
The standard form promissory Note and accompanying Loan Documents that 
Prestamos and the members of the Classes entered into are binding, enforceable agreements.  
220. 
  Among other provisions, the Note identifies the specific PPP loan, SBA loan 
number and amount of the loan; specifies that the parties to the Note are, respectively, the Class 
member borrower and the “Lender” Prestamos; provides that, “[i]n return for the Loan, Borrower 
promises to pay to the order of the Lender” the principal amount of the PPP loan plus “interest 
on the unpaid principle balance, and all other amounts required by this Note” if not forgiven; 
contains other PPP loan repayment terms and events of default and the lender’s rights in the 
event of the borrower’s default; contains other provisions, including that “[a]ll individuals and 
entities signing this Note are jointly and severally liable”; and, as to each Plaintiff and member 
of the Classes, states that, “[b]y signing below, each individual or entity becomes obligated 
under this Note as Borrower.” 
221. 
In addition, the Additional Agreement that accompanies the promissory Note 
between the Plaintiff Class member borrowers and Prestamos provides additional terms and 
states, at the outset, explicitly as follows: 
“In consideration of Prestamos CDFI, LLC, located at 1024 E. Buckeye 
RD, Suite 270, Phoenix, AZ 85034, (hereinafter called ‘Lender’) making 
the above loan, each of the undersigned, jointly and severally, do hereby 
agree as follows ….” 
 
222. 
The Loan Document contracts entered into by Prestamos and the members of the 
Plaintiff borrower Classes also include a “Notice - No Oral Agreements” document. That 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 50 of 61

51 
 
document governs the “Loan by Lender, Prestamos CDFI, LLC to Borrower”; identifies each 
Class member borrower and the SBA-approved amount of the loan; states that “THE 
WRITTEN LOAN AGREEMENT REPRESENTS THE FINAL AGREEMENT 
BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF 
PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE 
PARTIES”; states that the “‘Loan Agreement’ means one or more promises, promissory notes, 
agreements, undertakings, security agreements, deeds of trust or other documents or 
commitments, or any combination of those actions or documents, pursuant to which a financial 
institution loans or delays repayment of or agrees to loan or delay repayment of money, goods, or 
another thing of value or to otherwise extend credit or make a financial accommodation”; and is 
executed by both Prestamos via its President Martinez, and each Class member borrower.   
223. 
A complete copy of one such Loan Document is attached to this Amended 
Complaint as Exhibit A (with only Plaintiff’s Social Security and bank account number 
redacted). 
224. 
Through its agreement to make PPP loans via the Loan Documents, its acceptance 
and approval of Plaintiffs’ PPP loan applications, and as the counterparty to the Loan 
Documents, Prestamos entered into a binding agreement with each of the Plaintiffs and the 
members of the proposed National Class to fund their respective PPP loans. 
225. 
Plaintiffs and the members of the National Class gave consideration that was fair 
and reasonable, and have performed all conditions, covenants, and promises required to be 
performed under their Loan Documents with Defendant. 
226. 
Plaintiffs and the members of the National Class kept their end of the bargain by 
providing all documents and information requested by Prestamos. Prestamos failed to complete 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 51 of 61

52 
 
its end of the bargain by failing to make the PPP loans to Plaintiffs and the members of the 
National Class.   
227. 
Further, Prestamos had an implied duty to act in good faith and in accordance 
with fair dealing to take all steps necessary to fund the Plaintiffs’ and the other National Class 
members’ PPP loans pursuant to the Loan Documents. 
228. 
Defendant breached its obligations to fund Plaintiffs’ and other National Class 
members’ PPP loans under the Loan Documents by failing to fund the loans within 10 days of 
the SBA’s approval of the loans and assignment of loan numbers, or at any time thereafter. 
229. 
Prestamos’s failure to properly fund the loans of Plaintiffs and the other members 
of the National Class also breached its obligations under the Additional Agreement that, “[i]n 
consideration of Prestamos … making the above loan, each of the undersigned, jointly and 
severally, do hereby agree as follows: …”; the term in the Notice - No Oral Agreements that the 
“Loan by Lender, Prestamos CDFI, LLC to Borrower … in the amount of $ … REPRESENTS 
THE FINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND MAY NOT BE 
CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR 
SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES”; and the term in the Notice - 
No Oral Agreements that the “‘Loan Agreement’ means one or more promises, promissory 
notes, agreements, undertakings, security agreements, deeds of trust or other documents or 
commitments, or any combination of those actions or documents, pursuant to which a financial 
institution loans or delays repayment of or agrees to loan or delay repayment of money, goods, or 
another thing of value or to otherwise extend credit or make a financial accommodation.” 
230. 
By failing to fund the SBA-approved loans of Plaintiffs and the members of the 
National Class, Prestamos not only breached the terms of the Loan Documents as alleged, but 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 52 of 61

53 
 
also failed to perform the central purpose of the parties’ agreement which was to timely and 
properly fund these SBA-approved loans. 
231. 
Moreover, all PPP loan applications require applicants to certify that they have 
not, and will not, receive other PPP loans as alleged more fully above. 
232. 
As a result, once Plaintiffs and the other members of the National Class applied 
for PPP loans and their loan applications were approved by the SBA and assigned PPP loan 
numbers pursuant to the Loan Documents, Plaintiffs and the National Class members were no 
longer able to apply for PPP loans with other PPP lenders as they would not be able to certify 
that they would not receive another PPP loan, also as alleged more fully above. 
233. 
Plaintiffs and the National Class members were therefore effectively “stuck” with, 
and had to rely exclusively on, Prestamos to actually provide them with the PPP loan funds that 
they needed and that the SBA had already approved. 
234. 
As a result, Prestamos harmed Plaintiffs and the members of the National Class in 
an amount to be determined at trial, but not less than the amount of the wrongfully withheld PPP 
loan proceeds plus all other applicable damages to the full extent permissible by law. 
COUNT TWO 
 
Violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law  
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. 
(On behalf of Plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the California Subclass) 
 
235. 
Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations from all previous paragraphs as if fully set 
forth herein. 
236. 
The California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) defines unfair business 
competition to include any “unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent” act or practice. Cal. Bus. & Prof. 
Code § 17200. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 53 of 61

54 
 
237. 
A business act or practice is “unlawful” under the UCL if it violates any other law 
or regulation. 
238. 
Plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend have standing to bring this claim because these 
Plaintiffs are residents of California and are subject to the protection of the UCL. 
239. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund SBA-approved PPP loans breached the Loan 
Documents and accompanying legal duties it owed plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the 
other members of the California Subclass. 
240. 
As a result of its failure to fund the SBA-approved PPP loans, Prestamos obtained 
fees and other compensation to which it was not entitled, including fees on loans it never funded 
and loan proceeds rightfully belonging to plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the California 
Subclass, and wrongfully deprived plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the members of the 
California Subclass of PPP loan proceeds. 
241. 
When the PPP loans of plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the California 
Subclass were approved by the SBA, these SBA-approved borrowers had a vested interest in the 
PPP loan proceeds which Prestamos wrongfully withheld.   
242. 
Prestamos’s failures to fund these PPP loans thereby constitute a violation under 
the “unlawful” prong of the UCL. 
243. 
Similarly, Prestamos’s failure to fund SBA-approved loans also constitutes 
“unfair” acts and practices under the UCL because Prestamos’s acts and practices as alleged 
offend public policy and are immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous and substantially 
injurious to plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the members of the California Subclass. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 54 of 61

55 
 
244. 
Prestamos’s breaches of contract -- including not disbursing SBA-approved loan 
funds and “locking” these borrowers into Prestamos -- constitute an unfair practice because those 
breaches are immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, or substantially injurious. 
245. 
Once the loan applications of plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and other 
similarly situated members of the California Subclass were approved by the SBA, these Subclass 
member borrowers had to rely exclusively on Prestamos to actually fund their PPP loans and 
were thereby precluded from seeking PPP loans from other lenders, also as alleged above. 
246. 
Prestamos’s failure to fund PPP loans of plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and 
the other members of the California Subclass constitute unlawful and unfair business acts or 
practices within the meaning of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200. 
247. 
As a result of Prestamos’s violations of the UCL, plaintiffs Marshall and 
Townsend and the members of the California Subclass are, in the alternative and to the extent 
that their breach of contract claim fails to adequately award their damages for Prestamos’s 
violations as alleged herein, entitled to equitable relief, including specifically injunctive relief 
directing Prestamos to fund their SBA-approved loans in full with applicable interest from the 
date the loans should have been funded, or restitution for the amount of the wrongfully withheld 
PPP loan proceeds plus interest. 
COUNT THREE 
 
Violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act  
815 ILCS 505/1, et seq. 
(On behalf of Plaintiff Ahmadou and the Illinois Subclass) 
248. 
Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations from all previous paragraphs as if fully set 
forth herein. 
249. 
The Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (the “ICFA”) 
prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts or practices, including but not limited to the use or 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 55 of 61

56 
 
employment of any deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation or the 
concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact, with intent that others rely upon the 
concealment, suppression or omission of such material fact … in the conduct of any trade or 
commerce … whether any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby.” 815 Ill. 
Comp. Stat. § 505/2. 
250. 
In the course of its business, Prestamos concealed and suppressed material facts 
concerning funding the SBA-approved PPP loans of plaintiff Ahmadou and the members of the 
Illinois Subclass. Among other things, Prestamos falsely communicated its promises to: (1) act 
as a “Lender”; (2) hold Plaintiff and the Illinois Subclass members to obligations “[i]n 
consideration of Prestamos … making the … loan[s]” to which these SBA-approved borrowers 
were entitled; (3) otherwise fulfill the terms of its written agreements with plaintiff Ahmadou 
and the members of the Illinois Subclass. 
251. 
The ICFA also provides: “In construing this section consideration shall be given 
to the interpretations of the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts relating to Section 
5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act.” 815 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 505/2. 
252. 
Prestamos is a “person” as that term is defined for the purposes of 815 Ill. Comp. 
Stat. § 505/1(c). 
253. 
Plaintiff Ahmadou has standing to bring this claim because he is a resident of 
Illinois and subject to the protections of the ICFA. 
254. 
Plaintiff Ahmadou and members of the Illinois Subclass are “consumers” as that 
term is defined for the purposes 815 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 505/1(e). 
255. 
Prestamos’s conduct, as described in this amended complaint, constitutes 
“deceptive acts” in violation of the ICFA. 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 56 of 61

57 
 
256. 
Prestamos’s conduct, as described in this amended complaint, also constitutes 
“unfair” acts in violation of the ICFA. 
257. 
Prestamos’s unfair or deceptive acts or practices were likely to and did in fact 
deceive plaintiff Ahmadou and members of the Illinois Subclass with respect to its intention to 
fund their SBA-approved loans.  
258. 
The ICFA allows “[a]ny person who suffers actual damage as a result of a 
violation of this Act committed by any other person [to] bring an action against such person. The 
court, in its discretion may award actual economic damages or any other relief which the court 
deems proper .…” 815 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 505/10a. 
259. 
Plaintiff and the members of the Illinois Subclass suffered ascertainable loss and 
actual damages as a direct and proximate result of Prestamos’s concealment of and failure to 
disclose material information about the funding of their PPP loans. Plaintiff and Illinois Subclass 
members contracted with and thereby agreed to allow Prestamos to process and fund their SBA 
loans and would not have done so if the true nature of those services had been disclosed. 
260. 
Plaintiff Ahmadou and the Illinois Subclass seek monetary relief against 
Prestamos in the amount of actual damages, as well as punitive damages to the extent Prestamos 
acted with malice and/or was grossly negligent to the maximum extent permissible by law under 
the ICFA. 
261. 
Prestamos’s unlawful acts and practices complained of herein affect the public 
interest. 
262. 
Plaintiff Ahmadou and the Illinois Subclass also seek an order enjoining each 
Prestamos’s unfair and/or deceptive acts or practices, attorneys’ fees, and any other just and proper 
relief available under 815 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 505/1, et seq.   
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 57 of 61

58 
 
COUNT FOUR 
 
Violation of the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act 
Ohio Rev. Code §1345.01, et seq. 
(On behalf of Plaintiff Stalnaker and the Ohio Subclass) 
263. 
Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations from all previous paragraphs as if fully set 
forth herein. 
264. 
At all relevant times, plaintiff Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio Subclass 
were “persons” within the meaning of Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4165.01(D). 
265. 
Plaintiff Stalnaker has standing to bring this claim because she is a resident of 
Ohio and subject to the protections of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act (the “ODTPA”).  
266. 
At all relevant and material times as described herein, Prestamos was engaged in 
“the course of [its] business” within the meaning of Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4165.02(A) with 
respect to the acts alleged herein. 
267. 
Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4165.02(A) provides that a “person engages in a 
deceptive trade practice when, in the course of the person’s business, vocation, or occupation, the 
person does any of the following: ... (7) Represents that goods or services have sponsorship, 
approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they do not have … 
(13) Advertises goods or services with intent not to supply reasonably expectable public 
demand.” 
268. 
Plaintiff Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio Subclass have suffered losses 
because of Prestamos’s employment of unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the course of its 
business to the detriment of plaintiff Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio Subclass and their 
respective businesses. Prestamos promised to, among other things: (1) act as a “Lender”; 
(2) perform its obligations to plaintiff Stalnaker and Ohio Subclass members including but not 
limited to “[i]n consideration of Prestamos … making the … loan[s]” to which plaintiff Stalnaker 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 58 of 61

59 
 
and the members of the Ohio Subclass were entitled; and (3) otherwise fulfill the terms of its 
written agreements with plaintiff Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio Subclass. 
269. 
Prestamos knew or should have known that those practices were deceptive in 
violation of ODTPA, Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4165.02(A). 
270. 
The facts that Prestamos concealed were material to the decisions of plaintiff 
Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio Subclass as to whether to select Prestamos to fund their 
SBA-approved loans, in that they would not have proceeded with Prestamos but for Prestamos’s 
misconduct. 
271. 
As a direct and proximate result of Prestamos’s misconduct alleged herein, 
plaintiff Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio Subclass were deceived into contracting with 
Prestamos to process their SBA-approved loans and have been damaged thereby. 
272. 
Prestamos is therefore liable to plaintiff Stalnaker and the members of the Ohio 
Subclass for the damages they sustained, plus statutory damages, penalties, injunctive relief, 
costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees to the maximum extent provided by the ODTPA. 
Prayer for Relief 
Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of the proposed Classes, respectfully request the 
following relief: 
A. 
an order certifying the Classes under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure; naming plaintiffs as representatives of the proposed National Class; naming plaintiffs 
Marshall and Townsend as representatives of the proposed California Subclass; naming plaintiff 
Ahmadou as representative of the proposed Illinois Subclass; naming plaintiff Stalnaker as 
representative of the proposed Ohio Subclass; and naming Plaintiffs’ attorneys as counsel for the 
Classes and the Subclasses; 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 59 of 61

60 
 
B. 
judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and the Classes on all applicable counts asserted 
herein; 
C. 
an award of compensatory, consequential and other damages to Plaintiffs and 
members of the Classes in amounts to be determined at trial to the maximum extent permissible 
by law, plus prejudgment interest; 
D. 
an order awarding all other forms of monetary relief to the maximum extent 
permissible by law, including payment to the Classes of all PPP loan proceeds owed and due to 
Plaintiffs and the members of the Classes with interest, as well as disgorgement of all fees 
Prestamos obtained in connection therewith to the maximum extent permissible by law; 
E. 
an order of equitable relief, in the alternative and to the extent that the breach of 
contract claim of plaintiffs Marshall and Townsend and the members of the California Subclass 
fails to adequately award their damages for Prestamos’s violations, including injunctive relief 
directing Prestamos to fund their SBA-approved loans in full with interest, or restitution in the 
amount of the wrongfully withheld PPP loan proceeds plus interest under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 
§ 17200; 
F. 
an award of punitive damages based on Prestamos’ intentional, wanton and 
malicious conduct, or its reckless disregard of Plaintiffs’ and the National Class members’ rights, 
in amounts to be determined at trial to the maximum extent permissible by law; 
G. 
an order awarding Plaintiffs and the Classes their reasonable attorneys’ fees and 
expenses and costs of this lawsuit, including but not limited to expert fees and costs, to the 
maximum extent permissible by law; 
H. 
an order awarding Plaintiffs and the Classes their reasonable attorneys’ fees and 
expenses and costs of this lawsuit in connection with any applicable PPP loans Prestamos funded 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 60 of 61

61 
 
after the October 1, 2021 date that this litigation was filed that are fairly and reasonably 
attributable to Plaintiffs filing and maintaining this litigation to the maximum extent permissible 
by law; and  
I. 
such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 
 
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury of any 
and all issues in this action so triable as of right. 
Dated:  January 14, 2021 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
BAILEY & GLASSER LLP 
 
By: /s/ Lawrence J. Lederer 
 
Lawrence J. Lederer (Pa. ID 50445) 
Michael L. Murphy (admitted pro hac vice)  
Patricia M. Kipnis (Pa. ID 91470) 
Bart D. Cohen (Pa. ID 57606) 
1055 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Suite 540 
Washington, DC 20007 
T.: 202.463-2101 
F.: 202.463-2103 
llederer@baileyglasser.com 
mmurphy@baileyglasser.com  
pkipnis@baileyglasser.com 
bcohen@baileyglasser.com  
 
- and - 
 
 
NOLAN HELLER KAUFFMAN LLP 
Justin A. Heller (admitted pro hac vice) 
Matthew M. Zapala (admitted pro hac vice)  
80 State Street, 11th Floor 
Albany, NY 12207 
T.:  518.449.3300 
F.:  518.432.3123 
jheller@nhkllp.com  
mzapala@nhkllp.com 
 
Case 5:21-cv-04337-JMG   Document 18   Filed 01/14/22   Page 61 of 61

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.paed.589575.18.0.pdf

Size

326,869 bytes

SHA-256

4a7ecd6ba02c69f926954d4b65c7b6543ebdfbe920370cd61963ebe81e06d9e9

Our copy

gov.uscourts.paed.589575.18.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)