Indictment — United States of America v. Orville Emanuel Shaw, Case 1:26-cr-00400-CEF (Dkt. 1, N.D. Ohio)

Summary

An indictment filed 09/02/26 in the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, Case 1:26-cr-00400, charges Orville Emanuel Shaw with wire fraud under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343 in Counts 1-2. It alleges that from in or around May 2020 through in or around September 2021, Shaw used companies he created, among them Destiny Investment Group, LLC and No Problem Auto Sales, LLC, to obtain EIDL and PPP loans through false statements about revenues, expenses and employees. The grand jury states that the SBA, Lender 1 and Lender 2 issued at least $756,582 in EIDL and PPP funds, in addition to EIDL Advance funds, supported by falsified tax forms. Count 1 is the July 15, 2020 EIDL application for Destiny Investment Group, LLC, and Count 2 is the July 16, 2020 application for Elijah Emanuel Development and Services, LLC.

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

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #:1 Filed: 09/02/26 1 of 8. PagelD #: 18

FILED
SEP 02 2026
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OnIO
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) INDICTMENT
)
Plaintiff, )
v. ) caseno. | *260R 00400
) Title 18, United States Code,
ORVILLE EMANUEL SHAW, ) Section 1343
)
Defendant. ) JUDGE FLEMING

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

At all times relevant to this Indictment, unless otherwise specified:

Defendant and Relevant Entities and Financial Institutions

1. Defendant ORVILLE EMANUEL SHAW resided in or around Glenn Heights,
Texas.

2. Destiny Investment Group, LLC was a commercial entity that Defendant created,
controlled, and owned with a business address in Maple Heights, Ohio. Defendant established
Destiny Investment Group, LLC in or around May 2013.

3s Elijah Emanuel Development and Services, LLC was a commercial entity that
Defendant created, controlled, and owned with a business address in Willoughby, Ohio.
Defendant established Destiny Investment Group, LLC in or around June 2013.

4, No Problem Auto Sales, LLC was a commercial entity that Defendant created,
controlled, and owned with a business address in Dallas, Texas. Defendant established No

Problem Auto Sales, LLC in or around January 2013.
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 2 of 8. PagelD #: 19

5. Shaw’s Investment Group, LLC was a commercial entity that Defendant created,
controlled, and owned with a business address in Euclid, Ohio. Defendant established Shaw’s
Investment Group, LLC in or around February 2011.

6. Shaw’s Investment Group, Inc. was a commercial entity that Defendant created,
controlled, and owned with a business address in Euclid, Ohio. Defendant established Shaw’s
Investment Group, LLC in or around February 2018.

7. Lender | and Lender 2 were third-party participating Paycheck Protection
Program lenders.

The Paycheck Protection Program

8. The United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an executive
branch agency of the United States government. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and
strengthen the nation’s economy by enabling the establishment and viability of small businesses,
and assisting in the economic recovery of communities after disasters. As part of this effort, the
SBA enabled and provided for loans, which had government-backed guarantees.

9. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a
federal law enacted in or around March 2020 and was designed to provide emergency financial
assistance to Americans suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. One
source of relief under the CARES Act was authorization for the SBA to issue loans to small
businesses and non-profit entities experiencing revenue loss due to the pandemic.

10. Two forms of assistance under the CARES Act were the Paycheck Protection
Program (“PPP”) and the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) program, both of which
provided loan assistance for certain businesses negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

11. The PPP was a COVID-19 pandemic relief program administered by the SBA that

provided forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses. The
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 3 of 8. PagelD #: 20

PPP permitted participating third-party lenders to approve and disburse SBA-backed PPP loans
to cover payroll, fixed debts, utilities, rent/mortgage, accounts payable and other bills incurred
by qualifying businesses during, and resulting from, the COVID-19 pandemic. PPP loans were
fully guaranteed by the SBA.

12. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business had to submit a PPP loan application,
which was signed by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP loan application
required the business (through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the program rules
and make certain affirmative certifications to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan, including that
the business was in operation and either had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll
taxes or paid independent contractors. A business applying for a PPP loan was required to
provide documentation showing its payroll expenses, such as filed federal income tax
documents.

13. PPP loan applications were electronically submitted or caused to be submitted by
the borrower and received through SBA servers located in Virginia or Oregon. Once approved,
the business received the PPP loan proceeds via an electronic funds transfer from the third-party
lender to a financial account under the control of the business.

14. The proceeds of a PPP loan could be used for certain specified items, such as
payroll costs, costs related to the continuation of group health care benefits, or mortgage interest
payments. The proceeds of a PPP loan were not permitted to be used by the borrowers to
purchase securities, consumer goods, automobiles, personal residences, clothing, jewelry, to pay
the borrower’s personal federal income taxes, or to fund the borrower’s ordinary day-to-day

living expenses unrelated to the specified authorized expenses of the business.
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 4 of 8. PagelD #: 21

The Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program

15. Certain provisions of the CARES Act, in conjunction with an officially declared
disaster by the United States Government, allowed the SBA to offer EIDL funding to businesses
and non-profit organizations that existed in an operational condition on February 1, 2020, and
were negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

16. | To apply for EIDL funding, applicants submitted personal and business
information via the SBA online portal. The EIDL application process involved filling out an
electronic form with information relating to the applicant’s business in the 12 months prior to the
COVID-19 pandemic.

17. The information to be provided to the SBA by the applicant included the
ownership of the affected business; the size of the business; the type of business; the number of
employees; the gross business revenues realized; and the cost of goods sold. This information,
submitted by the applicant, was then used by SBA systems to calculate the amount of money the
applicant was eligible to receive.

18. When submitting an application, applicants for EIDL funding had to affirmatively
certify by checking a box that the information in the application was true and correct under the
penalty of perjury and applicable criminal statutes. Applicants generally did not have to submit
documentation supporting the representations in the applications.

19. — In conjunction with the submission of an EIDL application, at certain times
during the EIDL program, an applicant could also request and then receive an EIDL Cash
Advance Grant (an “Advance”), generally up to $1,000 per employee, up to a total of $10,000.
The Advance was not required to be repaid to the SBA if the loan application was ultimately
denied by the SBA, or if the applicant declined the EIDL that might be offered by the SBA at a

later date.
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 5 of 8. PagelD #: 22

20. Anon-agricultural, for-profit applicant was generally eligible to receive EIDL
funding in an amount corresponding to its gross margin over six months (generally consisting of
the reported revenue minus the reported cost of goods sold), less the amount of any Advance and
certain other government-backed compensation, with interest accruing at a rate of 3.75%.
Certain businesses and non-profit entities received a lower interest rate.

21. Funds paid by the SBA under the EIDL program were processed and issued by
SBA from the state of Colorado and sent to the applicant borrower’s financial institution.

22. Pursuant to the provisions governing the EIDL program, loan proceeds were
required to be used by the affected business receiving EIDL funding only for certain permissible
expenses of the business. Proceeds from the loans could be used as working capital to pay
normal operating expenses such as continuation of health care benefits, rent, utilities, and fixed
debt payments.

COUNTS 1-2
(Wire Fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343)

The Grand Jury charges:
23. The factual allegations of paragraphs 1 through 22 of this Indictment are re-
alleged and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

The Scheme to Defraud

24. From in or around May 2020, through in or around September 2021, in the
Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, and elsewhere, Defendant ORVILLE EMANUEL
SHAW devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud the Small Business
Administration and Lenders 1 and 2, and to obtain money and property by means of materially
false and fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises, knowing that the pretenses,

representations, and promises were false and fraudulent when made.
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 6 of 8. PagelD #: 23

Purposes of the Scheme

25. The purpose of the scheme was for Defendant to unjustly enrich himself by
(a) obtaining COVID -19 pandemic stimulus funds, including EIDL and PPP loans from the
SBA and PPP lenders, through false statements; (b) diverting proceeds for Defendant’s use; and
(c) concealing the scheme.

Manner and Means of the Scheme

26. — It was part of the scheme that:

a. Defendant made false representations on COVID -19 pandemic stimulus
applications, including EIDL and PPP applications, including false representations about the
applicant businesses and about his intention to use the proceeds of the loans consistent with the
EIDL and PPP program rules.

b. Defendant created and submitted falsified documents to support the
applications.

c. Once Defendant received ill-gotten proceeds, he transferred funds to
various accounts under his control and used funds to make personal expenditures and to benefit
other businesses he owned and controlled.

d. Defendant made false representations to obtain PPP forgiveness, claiming
to have spent PPP loan proceeds in a manner that qualified for a PPP loan to be forgiven, in order
to cause the SBA pay off the amount due on the loan, including accrued interest, on the
borrower’s behalf, effectively converting a PPP loan into a government grant obtained by fraud.

Acts in Furtherance of the Scheme

27. In furtherance of the scheme and to accomplish its purpose, Defendant committed
and caused to be committed, in the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, and elsewhere,

the following acts, among others:
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 7 of 8. PagelD #: 24

28. | Onor about the dates listed below, Defendant applied for the following EIDL and

PPP loans, using materially false statements about the entities’ revenues, expenses, and

employees, causing the SBA, Lender 1, and Lender 2 to approve the applications and

collectively to issue at least $756,582 in EIDL and PPP funds, in addition to EIDL Advance

funds:
Name Type Lender Application Funded Date Amount
Date

No Problem Auto EIDL SBA June 19, 2020 June 26, 2020 $150,000
Sales, LLC
Shaw’s Investment EIDL SBA June 27, 2020 July 14, 2020 $150,000
Group, Inc
Destiny Investment EIDL SBA July 15, 2020 August 5, 2020 $150,000
Group, LLC
Elijah Emanuel EIDL SBA July 16, 2020 August 5, 2020 $150,000
Development and
Services, LLC
No Problem Auto PPP | Lender1| May 9, 2020 May 13,2020 | $20,832
Sales, LLC
Shaw’s Investment PPP Lender2 | June 12, 2020 June 16, 2020 $67,875
Group, Inc.
Destiny Investment PPP Lender 2 June 25, 2020 June 26, 2020 $67,875
Group, LLC

TOTAL $756,582

a.

In support of these fraudulent applications, Defendant submitted falsified

documents, including (a) a falsified 2020 Form 941 (Employer’s Quarterly Federal Tax Return)

for Shaw’s Investment Group, Inc., (b) falsified 2019 and 2020 Forms 941 (Employer’s

Quarterly Federal Tax Return) for Destiny Investment Group, LLC, and (c) a falsified

Schedule C (Profit or Loss from Business) to Form 1040 (Individual Income Tax Return), in a

PPP application for No Problem Auto Sales, LLC.
Case: 1:26-cr-O0400-CEF Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/02/26 8 of 8. PagelD #: 25

Execution of the Scheme

pick On or about the following dates, in the Northern District.of Ohio, Eastern
Division, and elsewhere, Defendant ORVILLE EMANUEL SHAW, for the purpose of executing
the scheme described above, and attempting to do so, transmitted, and caused to be transmitted,
by means of wire communication in interstate commerce the following writings, signs, signals,
pictures, and sounds, each transmission routed from Ohio across state lines, and each constituting

a separate count of this Indictment:

Count Date Transmission Description

1 July 15, 2020 Electronic submission of EIDL application in the
name of Destiny Investment Group, LLC

2 July 16, 2020 Electronic submission of EIDL loan application in
the name of Elijah Emanuel Development and
Services, LLC

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

A TRUE BILL.

Original document - Signatures on file with the Clerk of Courts, pursuant to the E-Government

Act of 2002.


File and source

File

1-unsealed-indictment.pdf

Size

1,613,546 bytes

SHA-256

f060b7e051dfb004c221756a56ae55bde0ad85e13baeb0a7a53a66b4c9a3d4a9

Our copy

1-unsealed-indictment.pdf

Original

storage.courtlistener.com