Court filing

Crim Flsd Unknown Us V Andre Clark Docx Complaint - Us V Andre Clark

Summary

A criminal complaint in United States of America v. Andre Clark in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, stamped August 3, 2020 and supported by an IRS-CI special agent's affidavit. It charges wire fraud, bank fraud, and attempt and conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud. The affidavit alleges that a cooperating source submitted a Paycheck Protection Program application for Clark's company, Top Choice LLC, with purported Forms 941 and a forged bank statement, seeking $488,565 on a stated average monthly payroll of $195,426 for 25 employees. It states that the loan amount was wired into the Top Choice account after the accounts had been frozen. It also states that his communications with the source contain information on at least 14 individuals and 15 entities linked to PPP loans totaling more than $3.5 million.

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

Full text

A()9t4.
Ittv (l
18/()
9j t%rsmlnasComplakqt

U NITED STATES D ISTRIC'I'COURT
forthe
Southern DistricttAfFlorida

United StatesofAlnerica
V.

c-,x-w
. p-ysvr
.-

Andre Cl
ark,

-----

lLti?
otkttdantfvt/

CRIM INAL CO M PLAINT

1.thecomplainantinthiscase,statethatthefollowing istruelothebestofmy knowledgeand belief.
()noraboutthedatets)of
M@yl9-Jj!.
q#-;4,2020
inthccountyof
BfgF#J# .... .,. - . inthe
Spq1w
hq.
m-...... Disîrictof
Fl
orid: ......,...- - ,....... . Shedelk.ndantts)violaîed:
..-

...

, ,,

(A
odetqec//tzrl

tlttltnseDe.
ç
-erï
r//tw'
l

18U.S.C.jj 1343and2
18U.S.C.55 1344 and2
18U.S.C.â1349

W ire Fraud
BankFraud

Conspiracy/Attemptto CommitW ire and BankFraud

Thiscriminalcomplaintisbasedonthesefacts:
SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT.

Troy T. Walker

Aug 3, 2020

W Continuedontheattachedsheet
.

f-t??'
?.)#&//'?.
?tz!.
)/'
xsignuture

Miçhg#lBvl
rliyvgn#,SpeçiplAgqnt,IRS-CI
Prinledatzr?leaœl/ïl/t:
z
.

Attesîed to by theapplicanlin accordance withtherequiremelus01-Fed. R.Crim.P.4.lby telephlme.

rlate: K

o
//?z/pt?v.
.
%flt/'tz/llrta

City and state:

Ft. Lypderd#l
e,ql
oli
d:

Hpq,P#tfjçkii
M:HMnt.
,M.
!#.
-##gi>tr#,
t#)pdg#
.

ri
l?f,tktlcl,tt
it,,,,f
;rtitl.t

M 'FIDA W T
1,M ichaelBenivegna,being firstduly sworn,hereby depose and state asfollows:
IN TR O DU CH O N A ND A G EN T B ACK G R O UND

Im ake thisA ffidavitin supportofa crim inalcom plaintcharging AN D RE CLA RK

(ViCLARK''orttDefendant''),withwirefraud,bankfraud,attemptandconspiracytocolnmitwire

fraudandbankfraud,inviolationof18U.S.C.jj1343,1344,1349,and2,from onoraboutMay
19,2020,to atleaston oraboutJune 24 2020,in the Southern Districtof Florida,and elsewhere

(thettl-argetOffenses'').
Defendant has participated in a schem e to obtain by fraud m illions of dollars in

forgivable loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (ûtPPP'') and other government
programs,conspiringwithapersonnow cooperatingwiththeinvestigation(CCCHS2'')andothers.
DefendantobtainedafraudulentPPP loanforhisowncompany,Top ChoiceLLC (%:TopChoice''),
w ith CH S 2 providing falsified doctlm ents and subm itting the application on Defendant'sbehalf.

Defendantalso conspired to subm ita ntlmber of additionalfraudulentPPP loan applications for
othercom paniesby recruitingotherconfederate loan applicants,in orderto receive kickbacksfrom
those confedemtes. To inflate the size of these PPP loans,and the corresponding kickbacks,the
conspirators relied on a variety of false statem ents, including by subm itting falsified bank
statem ents and payrolltax form s. Forexample,the conspiratorsused nearly identicalversionsof
the sam e fabricated bank statem ents,recycled in the PPP applicationsform ultiplecompanieswith
m inorchanges.
The conspirators in the scheme planned or prepared at least 90 fraudulent
applications,m ostofwhich were subm itted. Based on the evidence investigatorshave review ed
to date,CH S 2,Defendant,and theirco-conspiratorsapplied forPPP loansthatare togetherworth

more than $24 million dollars,with atleastapproximately42 ofthoseloansapproved andfunded
foratotalofapproximately $17.4 m illion. Certain ofthose loanrecipientsthen wired akickback
of varying am ounts, often approxim ately 25% of the fraudulent loan proceeds, to an account
controlled by CH S 2.
Iam a SpecialA gentwith the United StatesDepartmentofThe Treasury,Internal

RevenueService,Criminallnvestigation(û$lRS-C1'')andhave1enemployedinthiscapacitysince
October 2016. lam presently assigned to the M iam iField Oftk e. M y dutiesasa SpecialA gent

include theinvestigationofpossiblecrim inalviolationsofthe lnternalRevenueCode(Title 26of

theUnitedStatesCode),theBankSecrecyAct(Title31oftheUnited StatesCode),andtheMoney
Laundering Statutes (Title l8 of the United States Code).I graduated from the Criminal
InvestigatorTraining Program atthe FederalLaw Enforcem entTraining Centerin April20 17 and
the Special A gent lnvestigative Techniques program at the National Crim inal Investigation
Training Academy in July 2017. ln these two program s,Istudied a variety of 1aw enforcement

tactics and crim inalinvestigatortechniques relating to tax and financialcrim es.Since becom ing
an IRS-CI SpecialA gent,1have personally investigated and assisted in investigations relating to
the IntenxalRevenue Law sand financialcrim es. Recently,Ihave been assigned to work with the

U.S.Departm entof Justice and other law enforcem entpartners,including the FederalBureau of
lnvestigation and the SmallBusiness Adm inistration Offk e of lnspector G enelal,to investigate

possible fraud associated with the stimulus and economic assistance pregrams created by the
federalgovernm entin response to the COW D-19 prop am .
n e facts in this A ffldavitcom e from n1y personalobservations,my training and
experience,and infbrmation obtained from otherm embersof1aw enforcem entand from witnesses.

Page 2 of14

ThisAffidavitis intended to show m erely thatthere is sufficientprobable cause and doesnotset
forth allofm y know ledge aboutthism atter.l
PRO BABLE CAUSE
The Jk pc/lcck Protection Pros am

TheCoronavirusAid,Relief,and Economic Security (EICARES'')Actisafedeml

law enacted in or arotlnd M arch 2020 and designed to provide em ergency fm ancialassistance to
the m illions of A mericans who are suffering the econom ic effects caused by the CO VlD-19

pandemic.One sourceofreliefprovided by the CARES Actwastheauthorizmtionofup to $349

billioninforgivableloanstosmallbusinessesforjobretentionandcertainotherexpenses,through
apropam referredtoasthePPP.lnoraround April2020,Conpessauthorized over$300billion
in additionalPPP funding.
ln order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business m ust subm it a PPP loan
application, which is signed by an authorized representative of the business. 'I'
he PPP loan

application requiresthe business (through its authorized representative)to acknowledge the
prop am rulesand m ake certain affirm ative certifications in orderto be eligible to obtain the PPP

loan.lnthePPP loanapplication,thesmallbusiness(through itsauthorizedrepresentative)must
state,amongotherthings,its:(a)averagemonthlypayrollexpenses;and(b)numberofemployees.
These Ggures are used to calculate the am ountofm oney the sm allbusiness is eligible to receive
under the PPP. ln addition,btlsinesses applying for a PPP Ioan must provide docum entation
showingtheirpayrollexpenses.
1
n e conductand chargesdescribed in thisAffidavitare partofa largerinvestigation that
is being conducted in this D istrict and elsewhere. As a result, not aIl num bered sources and
anonym ous individualsand entitiesare described in every filing. Ihave included in thisAffidavit
only those individualsand entitiesIhavedeemed necessary to explain the particularfactssetforth
here.

Page3 of 14

A PPP loan application m ustbe processed by a participating lender. lfa PPP loan

application is approved,the participating lender fundsthe PPP loan using its ow n m onies,w hich

are 100% guaranteedbythe SmallBusinessAdm inistration (E(SBA''). Datafrom theapplication,
including inform ation aboutthe borrow er,the totalamountofthe loan,and the listed num berof

em ployees,istransm itted by the lenderto the SBA in the courst ofprocessingthe loan.
PPP loan proceeds m ustbe used by the businesson celain perm issible expensespayrollcosts,intereston m ortgages,rent,and utilities. 'Ihe PPP allow sthe interestand principal
on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven ifthe businessspendsthe Ioan proceedson theseexpense

item sw ithin a desir ated period oftim e afterreceiving theproceedsand usesa certain am ountof
the PPP loan proceedson payrollexpenses.
The Schem e to Obtain FraudulentPPP Loans

10. On oraboutMay 13,2020,Phillip J.Augustin (ltAtlgustin'')and CHS 2worked
togetherto subm ita fraudulentPPP loan application on behalfofa com pany owned by Augustin.

Augustin submitted a PPP loan of$84,515toa federally insured bank (hereinafterlsBank3,5),
through a third-party company processor(hereinafter:tBank Processor 1'').2 The application
included bank statem entsthatareclearforgeries,and CHS 2 hasadm itted thatthe application was
based on docum entsthathe falsified forAugustin.3

2
Al1 banks referenced in this Affidavit are insured by the Federal Deposit lnsurance
Corporation.

OnJune25,2020,investigatorsarrestedCHS2andanotherjersonnow cooperatingwith

theinvestigation(EtCHS3'')andexecuted searchwarrantsattheirresldences.Followinghisarrest,
CH S 2 chose to cooperate with the investigation in the hope ofobtaining favorable consideration
in connection w ith hispending charges. CH S 2 w as interview ed on thatday,and hascontinued to
cooperate w ith the investigation afterobtaining counsel. M ostof his statem ents related herein
have been corroborated by records obtained from third pal-ties or recovered from his electronic
devices.

Page 4 of14

11.

Follow ingthe successofthatinitialfraudulentPPP application,Augustin and CH S

2 began to work on obtaining more and larger PPP loans for Augustin's associates and others,

generally forseveralhundred thousand dollarsforeachloan,uptoasmuchasapproximately $1.24
m illion. Based on the evidence investigators have reviewed so far, CH S 2 and Augustin

collectivelycoordinatedapplicationsforPPP loansthatalr togetherworth morethan $24m illion

dollars. Theevidencealso showsmanymorePPPloanswereattempted btltrejectedbybanksc)r
their partners, or were planned and prepared,but not stlbm itted before CHS 2's arrest. The
evidence suggests that allor nearly a1Iof those loan applications were fraudulent, including

Defendant's Ioan application and the applicationsDefendantorchestrated by refening additional
confederatesto the conspiracy.
lnvestigators have obtained m any other PPP Ioan applications that CH S 2 has
adm itted he subm itted aspal'tofthisschem e,based on falsified documents,and havealso obtained
draftdocumentsused orintended to be used in those applicationsorothers. These applicationsall
follow the sam e pattern of fraud- many w ith obviously counterfeit February 2020 bank

statements,and allwith fabricated IRS Forms941(titled,''Employer'sQuarterly FederalTax
Return'')withthesameindiciaoffraudfound in Augustin'sinitialapplication butgenerallywith
even larger inflated payrollnum bers,thus yielding m uch larger 1oans.4 CH S 2 has explained to

investigatorsthatthe figures in the Form s941 w ere the productofa form ula thatallow ed him to
startw ith a targetloan amount,and then d%back into''the payrollfigureson the form .He explained

how heused figuresthatwould producean averagem onthly payrollfor2019that,when m ultiplied
by 2.5,would yield the requested loan am ount. ln turnsthe number ofem ployees reported w as

Som e loan applications also included voided checksthatappearto be falsified,such asa

purportedBank5checkthatappearstohavebeenproducedonacomputerand,asthesubjectline
reads,ttconverted to PDF,''ratherthan a scan ofan authentic check.

Page 5 of14

chosen based on tk tionalpayrollfigures,chosen to avoid an average employee salary thatm ight
raise suspicion.

CH S 2 has also explained that he tried to use bank statem ents show ing that the
com pany had a Iarge balance. Because so few com panies had such a statement,and likely also
because itw aseasierthan keepingtrack oftheirtruestatem ents,CH S 2 repeatedly subm itted nearreplicasofthe sam e falsified bank statem ents. In particular,CH S 2 appearsto have recycled one
statem enteach from Bank l,Bank 6,and Bank 7. In recycling a statement,CH S 2 generally
changed only the account nunlber and the accotlnt holder's name and address, such that each
version ofthe statem enthad identicalfiguresand line item sthroughoutthe statem ent.
14.

A review ofrecordsforbank accountscontrolled by CH S 2 atBank 5 conf-irm C HS

2's adm issionsthathe received numerous kickbacks,often ofapproxim ately 25% ofthe amount
ofthe loans,and thathe regularly w ired Augustin a share ofthatkickback in the early stagesof
the schem e. CH S 2 explained that they were doing so m any loans by the end ofM ay that he
changed course,instead w iring larger lump sum s,collecting Augustin's shares of the kickbacks
formultiple loansin one w ire.

lnvestigators are stillreceiving and analyzing records,butbased on a prelim inary

analysis,asofJuly 24,2020,investigatorshad identified a totalof$2,367,765.82 in transfersto
CH S 2'saccotlnts from entitiesthateach obtained a sizable PPP loan and thatw ere identified in
the PPP filesseized from CH S 2'sand anotherco-conspirator'sresidences,asdescribed below
orfrom individualsassociated w ith those entities.
The PPP loans identified above as im plicated in the fbregoing kickback payments
to CHS 2 representonly a fraction of the overallschem e. In executing search warrants atthe

respective residences ofCHS 2 and CHS 3.federalagents found stacksofpaper printed outand

Page 6 of 14

organized by entity,containing an 'iintake form ,''fabricated Form s 94l,or both for each entity.
The intake form scontaintd fields for the inform ation needed to fabricate the docum ents and fill
outotheraspects ofthe PPP application;identifying information aboutthe onmerand com pany,
aswellasbank accountinformation forreceivingthe loan.A section atthe end m arked (CBELO W

IS OFFICE U SE ONLY''included blank fitldsforthe ûûNum berofEm ployees,''lbM onthly Payroll
Expense,''and itSBA Loan Pre-ApprovalAmount.'' Between CH S 2's and CH S 3's residences,
investigators seized paperfiles forPPP loan applicationsforapproxim ately 80 differententities.
Data obtained from the SBA showed additional PPP loan applications from

additional entities that text m essage and em ail records show had been referred to CHS 2 by
D efendantorotherindividuals.

TheFraudulentPPP Loan toDefendant'sCompanv:Top Choice

18.

According to Florida'sDivision ofCorporationswebsite (û$Sunbiz''),Top Choice

LLC (%tTopChoice'')wasincorporatedinoraroundJune2018.CLARK islistedasthecompany's
presidentand registered agent. The addresslisted cm Sunbiz forTop Choice,4839 SW Volunteer
Road Suite 226,D avie,Florida,isthe sam e addresslisted forCLA RK with Florida'sDepartment
ofM otorVehicles. Investigatorsvisited this addressand were unable to find any businessnam ed
çç-l-op Choice''atthat location. Rather,thataddress appears to be m erely a m ailbox located in a
ddUS Pak-N-ship.''

19.

A ccording to Sunbiz, Top Choice w as adm inistratively dissolved in or around

September2019 forfailure to file an annualreport, ltw as then reinstated on oraboutM arch 29,
2020,two daysafterthe passage ofthe CARES Act.
20.

A ccording to bank records,on oraboutM ay 19,2020,CLA RK visited a bank in

M iram ar,Florida,and opened businesschecking and savingsaccountsin the nam e ofTop Choice.

Page 7 of 14

In opening the accounts,CLARK presented a North Carolina driverlicense and,to prove Florida

residence,provided a Florida Pow er& Lightpowerbillin the nam e of çû-l-op Choice''and atthe
sam e addresslisted forthe com pany on Sunbiz. The pow erbillstatesthatthe klmte''isforAERS-I
ResidentialService.''

CLA RK indicated to the bank that Top Choice had six em ployees and a gross

annualrevenueof$200,000.However,thebankrecordsfrom theseaccountsrevealatotalof$600

in deposits(and no withdrawals)forthe month ofM ay 2020.5
'
T'
he day after CI-ARK opened the Top Choice bank accotlnts, a PPP Ioan

application package on behalfofTop Choice waselectronically subm itted to Bank 3 through Bank

Processorl.Theloan applicationpackageincluded,amongotherdocuments:(1)purported Forms

941forallfourquartersof2019 in thenameofTop Choice;(2)acompany bankstatementfor
Top Choice;(3)an application form;and (4)apromissory note.
23.

The purported Form s 94l included in the application show quarterly payrollof

morethan$500,000eachquarter,for25employees.ThatquarterlypayrollfigureyieldedthePPP
loanapplication's''AverageM onthly Payroll''figureof$195,426,whichdeterminedthe$488,565
amountofthe loan.Each w assigned by hand with thenam e t'AndreClark''asthe com pany ow ner,
and also listed CLA RK as the com pany-s designee and as ak'Paid Preparer,''though he is nota

paidtax preparer. The Top Choice Form s94lfollow the sam estyleand pattern asthem any other
Form s 941 thatCH S 2,described above,acknowledged thathe helped create and subm it in the
course ofthe schem e,including in the indicia offraud.6 lRS recordsshow thatTop Choice did
5
The only activity in June 2020 consisted ofthe depositof the PPP loan proceeds. The
accountswere frozen on oraboutM ay 26,2020.

6
A snoted above,CLA RK w as listed as both ow ner and paid preparer. Dozens of other
Form s 94l subm itted in this scheme evidence the sam e error. CHS 2 has adm itted thatthese

Page 8 of 14

not,in fact,file any Form s 94l for any quarter of2019 orthe firstquarter of 2020,and Florida

D epal-tm entofRevenue recordsshow thatTop Choice did notreportany w agesoremployeesfor
thatsam e period.

24.

The purported com pany bank statem ent,which was submitted in electronic form at

isa clearforgery. First,the statementpurportsto be forthe m onth ofFebruary 2020,priorto the
date thataccountwasopened.Second,accordingto the decument'sfile''properties,''the statem ent
wascreated using CIPD FFILLER,''a program used to editelectronic PD F tsles,and wasçlmodified
using i'rext.''

25.

The application form ,labeled atthe top dspaymentProtection Program Borrower

A pplication Form,'' listed CLARK as the owner of Top Choice,claim ed the com pany had 25

employees,and stated thatthe average monthly payrollwas$l95,426. Based on thisfigure,the
amountofthe PPP loan requestwas$488,565. The application form required the borrowerto

electronicallyinitialanumberofibcertitk ationss''including:(1)thattheapplicantwasinoperation
on February 15,2020and had employeesto whom itpaid salaries/payrolltaxesorpaid independent

contractors,asreported on Formts) l099;(2)thatthe fundswould be used to retain.workers,
m aintain payroll,or make lmodgage/intelest/lease/utility paym ents as specified by the PPP rule

documentsshare thatfeature becausehe misunderstood the form,and he (orsomeonefollowing
his instructions)prepared allofthe Forms94latissue. The contentofthe formsalso indicate
falsification. A llfourquarterly forms are nearly identical,and the fourform sforTop Choice are
identical,down to thepenny,in reported figures. They also evidence apattern ofpayrollspending
thatislikely false:each ofthequarters show ssignificantincreasesfrom the firstto second to third
month ofthe quarter. For each identicalform ,the sam e figuresare reported forthe tax liability
incurred in the firstm onth of each quarter,the same figure forthe second m onth ofeach qualter

(increasedsubstantiallyfrom theGrstmonth),andthesamefigureforthethirdmonthofthequalter
(increasedsubstantiallyfrom thesecond month).Theresultisthatthecompanyreportsaperfectly
repeating cycle ofascendingpayrollcostsw ithin each quarter. CHS 2 hasexplained thatthiswas
due to a form ula he used,allocating differentpercentages ofthe quarterly payrolltax liability to
each month ofeach quarter.

Page 9 of14

andthatunauthorized usecould resultinchargesforfraud;and(3)thattheinformationprovided
in the application, including in supporting docunwnts, was tstrue and accurate in all material
respects,''and thatm aking false statements could resultin crim inalcharges.The application w as
electronically signed w ith the name çtA ndre Clarkj'' and each certification was electronically
initialed iiAC .''
26.

'
T'
he prom issory note,labeled atthe top kipaycheck Protection Prog am Loan,''set

forththeamountoftheloan($488,565)anditsterms(includingthattheproceedscould onlybe
used for business purposes). The terms also specified thatthe borrowermay apply for loan
forgivenessonly in an am ountequalto the sum ofcertain specified costs:payrollcosts,intereston
m ortgageobligations,rentobligations,and utility paym ents.The prom issory notefurtherspecified
that notm ore than 25% ofthe am ount of forgiveness can be attributable to non-payrollcosts.
Additionally,the prom issory note contained a iille
.presentations and W arranties''section forthe
borrowerto acknow ledge,am ong other things that 'sthe inform ation provided in allsupporting
documents and form s to obtain this loan''were true and accurate. The prom issol'y note was
electronically signed w ith the name 'kA ndrew Clark.''
Based on the representations made in the loan application paperwork and
supporting docum ents,the PPP loan application forTop Choice w as approved,and on orabout

June l,2020,Bank 3 wired approximately $488,565 in loan proceedsinto theTop Choicebank
account.

Page 10 of14

CHS 2 Confirmed toLaw Enforcementthatthe Top ChoicePpp Loan WasFraudulentand
thatC'
Z-4WA Referred Othersto theScheme
28.

lnvestigatorsspokew ith CH S 2 aboutCLARK and theTop ChoicePPP loan.CHS

2 stated thathe had m etCLARK through Augustin. A ccording to CH S 2,the three ofthem met

on anumberofoccasions(sometimesatagasstation in Broward County)and discussedCLARK'S
PPP loansaswellasCLA RK 'Srefen'als,forwhich CLARK would receive a sm allcut. As stated
above,CH S 2 and Augustin had already agreed to sharethe 25% kickback paymentsthatCHS 2
w ould usually receive from referrals,including from CLARK 'Sreferrals.
As to the Top Choice PPP loan,CHS 2 confirmed thatthe loan application was
fraudulentand stated thathe had assisted CLARK in preparing and sublnitting it. Specifk ally,

CH S 2 stated thathe discussed the details ofthe loan w ith CLA RK,including the am ountofthe
loan and the num berofem ployeesclaimed cm the application. CH S 2 also explained to CLARK
that he would need a bank accountand need to hire em ployees in order to m ake the loan look
legitim ate.

Additionally CHS 2 stated thathe:(l)created forCLARK an online accountfor

TopChoicewithBankProcessor1;(2)cmatedandsubmittedthefakeTopChoicebankstatement;
and (3)created,submitted,and signed (on behalfofCLARK),the false Forms941.Accordingto
CH S 2,he did notrecallsigning the application form orprom issory note,buthe w asuncertain on

thispoint. Bank Processor l'sIP recordsforthe Top Choice loan application show thata computer

withanIP address(ending in l70)associatedwithCHS2'sresidence in Broward County,Florida,
logged into the Top Choice loan accountasearly asM ay 19,2020.

CH S 2 also stated that,in addition to the Top Choice loan,CLARK refbrred to him
a num ber of triends/associates for the purpose ofcreating and subm itting additionalfraudulent
PPP loans. As stated above,CH S 2 and Augustin would share the kickback paym ents forthese

Page 11 of14

referrals. CH S 2 stated that he did not know how CLA RK got paid for his referrals but that
Augustin told him thatCLARK was getting a cut.

Emailsand TextM essazesConflrm CLARK 'SKnowinz Participation in theFraud
32.

A s pa14 of its investigation,law enforcement obtained comm unications between

CH S 2 and CLARK, including text m essages and em ails. l have reviewed a num ber ofthese
com munications,which discuss,am ong otherthings,CLARK 'S PPP loan and the loans for the
individualsand com panieshe referred to CH S 2.
Forexanlple,on or aboutM ay 19,2020,CHS 2 sent CLARK a textm essage that

stated:;;HiAndrethisis(CHS 2)lock in my numberlam workingon yourfile lneed social
security num berand date ofbirth.
'' CLA RK responded w ith his date ofbirth and socialsecurity
num ber. Thatsam e day,CLARK texted CH S 2 hisem ailaddress,and CH S 2 responded:ûûcheck
yourem ailand activate youraccountJustopen em ailand click the link.''

On or about M ay 20,2020,CLA RK forwarded CH S 2 an em ailhe had received

from BankProcessor1withthesubject,tdYouhaveanofferforthePaycheckprotectionProgram.''
The em ail stated:t'Andre,the SBA has finished review ing your application and you've been
approved for your Paycheck Protection Program loan. Accept your offkr to access m ore
inform ation,including the nextsteps.''Theemailincluded a link button to click,labeled tiA ccept.''
35.

On oraboutM ay 20,2020,CLA RK separately texted CHS 2 w ith inform ation that

appearsto relateto a differentfraudulentloan application. In the textm essage,CLA RK provided:

(1)asocialsecuritynumber;(2)dateofbirth;(3)emailaddress;(4)businessstartdate;and(5)
state of incorpomtion. (CHS 2 explained that CLARK was serving as a refkrralsource,or
middleman,between CHS 2 and the applicant,in exchange for a smallfee). Aflergetting the
information from CLARK ,CH S 2 responded thathe needed a check from the business. CLA RK

Page 12 of14

asked by textmessage:'tshould he go to the bank in the m orning and gettemporary checkswhile

heordersomel?l,''towhichCHS2respondediilylesweneedcheck.''
36.

On oraboutM ay 27,2020,CLARK senta textm essage to CH S 2 w ith inform ation

regardinganother,differentreferral.Thisinform ation provided by CLA RK included,am ong other

things:(1)theindividual'sname,address,dateofbirth,socialsecuritynumber,ande-mailaddress'
,
(2)theindividual'sbusinessname,businessaddress,EIN,andbusintssstartdate;and (3)bank
accountand routing num bers. On or about M ay 28,2020,regarding this same referral,CH S 2

texted CIaA RK thathe needed i$a february statementfrom hercreditunion m ake stlre if she cant
download and send in pdfshe takesa good picture ofitso ican modify it.''
37.

On oraboutM ay 30,2020,CLA RK texted CH S 2:tçldow m any Igave you so far

thatisworkingbesidesthefirsttwoonesalready completed(...)lwantatleast10morepeople
w ithin the nextfew days.''

38.

During my review ofCLARK 'Scomm unicationsw ith CH S 2,lfound whatappears

to be inform ation pertaining to atleast14 differentindividualsand atleast15 associated corporatt
entities. Further investigation,including review ofdata collected by the SBA and bank records,

todatehasidentified PPP loanstotalingmorethan $3.5millionconespondingto these namesand
entities.

CLARK'SBankinz aglc//v//y Conft
-rmsH isKnowinz Participation in theFraud
39.

l have also reviewed Top Choice's and CH S 2's bank records,w hich conflrm

CLARK 'Sreceiptofthe PPP loan proceeds. Specifically,on oraboutJune 1,2020,Bank 3 w ired

the loan amount,$488,565,into the Top Choice account. As discussed above,however,Top
Choice's accountsw ere frozen on oraboutM ay 26,2020,so CLARK could notaccessthe PPP
loan funds.

Page 13 of14

40.

According to an invtstigator at Top Choice*s bank,CLARK called the bank

numeroustimesandthen visited thebank'sM itamarbranchlocation in ordertogethisaccounts
unfroz-en. During a phone conversation with CLARK , the bank investlgatorasked CIaARK about

the FPL powcrbillhe had subm itted when opening hisaccount. which tlw investigatorbelieved
was a tbrgery. CLARK denied ever subm itting the powerbill. W hen the invcstigator asked

CI-ARK about his PPP application,CLARK stated he would need to sptak to his accoununt.
W hen asked forthe namc ofhisaccountantsCLARK would notprovidc a name. Finally,when
the investigatortold CLARK thathisPPP loan wasstlspectedasfraudulent, CLARK sim ply stated
-ithank you''and hung tlp.
CO NCLUSIO N

Based onthefbrgoing.Ircspectfkll
y submitthattherc isprobablecauseto helieve
thatAN DRE CLARK comm itted the TargeîOffenses.
FURTHER Y()tJR A FFIAN 'I'SA YE'
)'I
'H NA UGHT

M ICI-IA E1-BEN IVEGNA
SpecialAgent
IRS-CI

Attested tobytheapplicantinaccordance
withthe requirementsof Q d.R.Crim . P.4.1
by telephone on this X
-.

I7ay ofA ugust.2020

Troy T. Walker

Aug 3, 2020

Hok PATRICK M.SIUNT
UN ITED STATES M AGISTRATE JtJIIGIn'

Page 14 ol'14

File and source

File: CRIM_FLSD_unknown_US-v-Andre-Clark_docX_COMPLAINT.pdf
Size: 907,139 bytes
SHA-256: 6dd014e5343d643cf73bbf8155e5bca7dc4381f4ce98fbbc2948b913a528b6ff
Our copy: CRIM_FLSD_unknown_US-v-Andre-Clark_docX_COMPLAINT.pdf
Original: www.justice.gov