Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings United States v. Aticha Jittaphol, a/k/a “Lily” Criminal Information — United States v. Aticha Jittaphol

Court filing

Criminal Information — United States v. Aticha Jittaphol

Filed September 13, 2021 in U.S. v. Aticha Jittaphol; one of 7 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts
Filed2021-09-13

U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts · No. 1:21-cr-10270-MLW · Doc. 1 · 2021-09-13 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Case 1:21-cr-10270-MLW Document1 Filed 09/13/21 Page 1 of 6

es
ES oy B

IN CLERKS OFFICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR ¢rp 13 py 9: 3]
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS) * moe 3

) i 9. DISTRICT COURT 21cr10270
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , (Guminal.No: DISTRICT OF MASS
) Violations:
v. )
) Counts One and Two: False Statements
)
)
Defendant )
)
INFORMATION

At all times relevant to this Information:

General Allegations

L. The defendant, ATICHA JITTAPHOL, a/k/a “LILY” (“JITTAPHOL”), was a
resident of Brighton, Massachusetts. JITTAPHOL was the president and owner of Mantra
Dhevi Spa, Inc. (“Mantra Dhevi Spa”).

Bi The Mantra Dhevi Spa was a business located at 9 Academy Hill Road, Brighton
MA.

a The Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an executive-branch agency of
the United States government that provided support to entrepreneurs and small businesses. The
mission of the SBA was to maintain and strengthen the nation’s economy by enabling the
establishment and viability of small businesses and by assisting in the economic recovery of
communities after disasters. As part of this effort, the SBA enabled and provided for loans
through banks, credit unions, and other lenders. These loans have government-backed

guarantees.
Case 1:21-cr-10270-MLW Document1 Filed 09/13/21 Page 2 of 6

4. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a
federal law enacted in March 2020 and designed to provide emergency financial assistance to the
millions of Americans who were suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19
pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the Paycheck Protection
Program (“PPP”), which was a loan designed to provide a direct incentive for small businesses to
keep their workers on the payroll.

5. The PPP application process required applicants to submit a loan application
through an SBA-approved financial entity. The PPP application was required to contain
information about the purpose of the loan, average monthly payroll, number of employees, and
background of the business and its owner, including questions relating to criminal history.
Applicants were also required to make good faith certifications, including that they intended to
use loan proceeds only for authorized purposes and they were not engaged in any illegal activity.

6. The PPP loan proceeds were required to be used on certain permissible expenses,
including payroll costs, mortgage interest, rent, and utilities. Under the program, the SBA
would forgive all or part of loans if all employees were kept on the payroll for eight weeks and
borrowers submitted documentation confirming that the loan proceeds were used for payroll,
rent, mortgage interest, or utilities.

7. Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America”) was a federally insured financial
institution based in Charlotte, North Carolina with branches throughout the United States. Bank
of America participated as a PPP lender and was authorized to lend funds to eligible borrowers

under the terms of the PPP.
Case 1:21-cr-10270-MLW Document1 Filed 09/13/21 Page 3 of 6

8. Another related response to the COVID-19 outbreak was an expansion of an
existing disaster-related program—the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”)—to provide for
loan assistance, including advances of up to $10,000, for small businesses and other eligible
entities for loans up to $2 million. The EIDL proceeds could be used to pay fixed debts, payroll,
accounts payable, and other bills that would have been paid had the disaster not occurred;
however, such loan proceeds were not intended to replace lost sales or profits or for expansion of
a business.

9. Unlike other types of SBA-guaranteed loans, EIDL funds were issued directly
from the United States Treasury and applicants applied through the SBA via an online portal.
The EIDL application process, which also used certain outside contractors for system support,
collected information concerning the business and the business owner.

False Statements

10. Since in or around 2017, JITTAPHOL owned and operated the Mantra Dhevi Spa,
which purported to be a legitimate massage parlor, but in fact, employees at the Mantra Dhevi
Spa engaged in commercial sex acts with the customers. Not only was JITTAPHOL aware that
commercial sex acts were being provided, she recruited employees with the understanding that
they would provide commercial sex services; promoted commercial sex services by allowing
employees to provide commercial sex services; attracted customers to Mantra Dhevi Spa by
causing her employees to engage in commercial sex; and derived financial support from the
commercial sex acts by collecting a portion of the proceeds that customers paid when they

received commercial sex services.
Case 1:21-cr-10270-MLW Document1 Filed 09/13/21 Page 4 of 6

11. | Beginning in or around March 2020, and continuing until at least in or around
May 2020, in the District of Massachusetts, JITTAPHOL devised a scheme to defraud and to
obtain EIDL and PPP funds by means of materially false statements to the SBA and its
authorized lenders. In particular, JITTAPHOL submitted EIDL and PPP applications that
falsely certified that the Mantra Dhevi Spa was not engaged in any illegal activity.

12. Onor about March 31, 2020, JITTAPHOL submitted an electronic EIDL
application to the SBA for the Mantra Dhevi Spa seeking a loan of approximately $30,000.
JITTAPHOL’s EIDL application contained the false and fraudulent statement that the “Applicant
is not engaged in any illegal activity (as defined by Federal Guidelines).” The SBA defined
“illegal activity” as “illegal activity under federal, state, or local law.”

13. Although the SBA found that JITTAPHOL did not qualify for the full loan
amount she requested, the SBA provided a $2,000 payment, under the EIDL Advance
program. JITTAPHOL received the $2,000 in SBA EIDL funds on or about April 22,

2020.

14. On or about April 7, 2020, JITTAPHOL submitted an electronic PPP
application for the Mantra Dhevi Spa through SBA-authorized lender Bank of America
seeking a $5,066.67 loan. JITTAPHOL’s PPP loan application contained the false and
fraudulent statement that, “The Applicant is not engaged in any activity that is illegal
under federal, state, or local law.”

15. JITTAPHOL received $5,066.67 under the PPP program on May 8, 2020.
Case 1:21-cr-10270-MLW Document1 Filed 09/13/21 Page 5 of 6

COUNT ONE
False Statements
(18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2))

The United States Attorney charges:

16. | The Grand Jury re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-15
of this Information.

17. On or about March 31, 2020, in the District of Massachusetts, the
defendant,

ATICHA JITTAPHOL, a/k/a “Lily,”

knowingly and willfully made a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement and
representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the Government of

the United States, as described in Paragraph 12 of the Information.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001(a)(2).
Case 1:21-cr-10270-MLW Document1 Filed 09/13/21 Page 6 of 6

COUNT TWO
False Statements
(18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2))

The United States Attorney charges:

18. | The Grand Jury re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-15
of this Information.

19. Onor about April 7, 2020, in the District of Massachusetts, the defendant,

ATICHA JITTAPHOL, a/k/a “Lily,”

knowingly and willfully made a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement and
representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the Government of

the United States, as described in Paragraph 14 of the Information.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001(a)(2).

NATHANIEL R. MENDELL
Acting United States Attorney

By: /s/Elysa QO. Wan
ELYSA Q. WAN
Assistant United States Attorney
ALYSSA TOCHKA
LUKE GOLDWORM
Special Assistant United States Attorneys

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.mad.237964.1.0.pdf
Size
410,225 bytes
SHA-256
cbe055198b86d9146f0c0349f144b80bcb9b0bc846dad957fb44a8f52e481b48
Our copy
gov.uscourts.mad.237964.1.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top