Indictment — United States v. Diane et al.

Record facts

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT v R OF · No. 2:23-cr-00037-MHW · Doc. 10 · 2023-02-14 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
v 
R 
OF 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 
23 F C ! t1 
~~ . 3: o 
EASTERN DIVISION 
7 
~; : ~ ~C. ~ 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Plaintiff, 
V. 
OUSMANE DIANE, 
DIABA DIANE, 
ESCO DAVIS, 
MOHAMED DIAKITE, 
MAMADOU DIAW, 
ISSIAH DOOLEY, 
LAMINE KOMARA. 
Defendants. 
THE GRAND JURY CHARGES: 
CASE NO 
JUDGE 
INDICTMENT 
18 U.S.C. § 1349 
18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(a)(1) & (b)(2) 
18 U.S.C. § 1343 
18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2) 
18 U.S.C. § 641 
18 U.S.C. §2 
FORFEITURE 
INTRODUCTION 
At times relevant to this Indictment: 
1. 
Defendants OUSMANE DIANE, DIABA DIANE, ESCO DAVIS, MOHAMED 
DIAKITE, MAMADOU DIAW, ISSIAH DOOLEY, and LAMINE KOMARA were residents 
of the Southern District of Ohio. 
2. 
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into 
law on March 27, 2020, to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of Americans 
who were suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES Act 
provided several sources of relief, including expanding states' ability to provide unemployment 
insurance ("UI") for many workers impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, even for workers who 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 1 of 12  PAGEID #: 17

were not ordinarily eligible for unemployment benefits. UI programs under the CARES Act 
included Pandemic Unemployment Assistance ("PUA"), Pandemic Emergency Unemployment 
Compensation ("PEUC"), and Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation ("FPUC"). 
3. 
Another program under the CARES Act was the Paycheck Protection Program 
("PPP"), a COVID-19 pandemic relief program administered by the Small Business 
Administration ("SBA") that provided forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and 
certain other expenses. The 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. 
4. 
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. 
5. 
PPP loan applications were electronically submitted or caused to be submitted by 
the borrower and received through SBA servers located in Virginia for applications submitted prior 
to January 11, 2021, and located in Oregon for applications submitted after that date. 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. 
2 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 2 of 12  PAGEID #: 18

6. 
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 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. 
7. 
Another source of pandemic relief was the Economic Injury Disaster Loan 
("EIDL") program, through which the SBA directly provided low-interest loans to qualifying 
businesses. The loans were to be used for working capital and normal operating expenses such as 
continuation of healthcare benefits, rent, utilities, and fixed debt payments. However, EIDL 
proceeds could not be used for disbursements of dividends or bonuses or any disbursements to 
owners, partners, officers, directors, or stockholders, except when directly related to performance 
of services for the benefit of the company. EIDL proceeds also could not be used to expand 
facilities or acquire fixed assets. Like PPP loans, EIDL loans varied in size based largely on 
number of employees and pre-pandemic expenses. 
8. 
One aspect of the EIDL program, the EIDL Advance, provided "advances" of up 
to $10,000 on EIDL loan proceeds that were in fact grants that did not have to be repaid. 
Disbursements of EIDL Advance funds were transmitted by SBA to the Treasury via a server 
located in Sterling, Virginia. 
COUNT 1 
(Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud—EIDL, 18 U.S.C. § 1349) 
9. 
Paragraphs 1 through 8 are incorporated here. 
10. 
From in or about June 2020 and continuing thereafter until in or about June 2021, 
in the Southern District of Ohio and elsewhere, defendants OUSMANE DIANE, ESCO DAVIS, 
3 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 3 of 12  PAGEID #: 19

MOHAMED DIAKITE, MAMADOU DIAW, ISSIAH DOOLEY, and LAMINE KOMARA, 
together with others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and intentionally conspired 
and agreed to commit wire fraud; that is, with intent to defraud, to devise and intend to devise and 
knowingly participate in a scheme to defraud in order to deprive another of money and property 
by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, and material 
omissions—specifically, filing false EIDL applications and misusing funds received—and for the 
purpose of executing and attempting to execute the scheme, knowingly used and caused another 
to use wire communications in interstate and foreign commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. 
Manner and Means of the Conspiracy 
It was part of the conspiracy that: 
11. 
O. DIANE submitted several of approximately 167 nearly identical EIDL 
applications on behalf of different individuals, using several identical pieces of business 
information, including gross revenues, cost of goods sold, the date the business was established, 
and the number of employees (the "EIDL Applications"). He frequently received a cut of the 
money paid to the recipients of the fraudulent EIDL Applications. 
12. 
DIAW submitted a separate EIDL application in his own name, ostensibly for a 
business using the trade name Mamadou Diaw Travel. 
13. 
Fraudulent EIDL Applications were filed in the names of DAVIS, DIAKITE, 
DOOLEY, and KOMARA. DAVIS' EIDL Applications were denied. DIAKITE, DOOLEY, 
and KOMARA received funds from the EIDL Applications filed in their names, and KOMARA 
passed some of his funds on to O. DIANE. 
14. 
DIAKITE, DIAW, and KOMARA recruited others to provide their personally 
identifiable information ("PII") to receive fraudulent funds, and EIDL Applications were filed 
using these individuals' PII. DIAKITE received a portion of the EIDL funds from a person he 
4 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 4 of 12  PAGEID #: 20

recruited and passed the funds on to a coconspirator. DIAW and KOMARA also received a 
portion of the EIDL funds from people they recruited. 
All in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. 
COUNT 2 
(Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud—PUA, 18 U.S.C. § 1349) 
15. 
Paragraphs 1 through 8 are incorporated here. 
16. 
From in or about May 2020 and continuing thereafter until in or about August 2021, 
in the Southern District of Ohio and elsewhere, defendants OUSMANE DIANE and DIABA 
DIANE, together with others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and intentionally 
conspired and agreed to commit wire fraud; that is, with intent to defraud, to devise and intend to 
devise and knowingly participate in a scheme to defraud in order to deprive another of money and 
property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, and 
material omissions—specifically, filing false PUA applications with various state workforce 
agencies ("SWAs") and possessing and using PUA debit cards issued as a result of the false 
applications—and for the purpose of executing and attempting to execute the scheme, knowingly 
used and caused another to use wire communications in interstate and foreign commerce, in 
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. 
Manner and Means of the Conspiracy 
17. 
It was part of the conspiracy that: 
a. O. DIANE used PII of multiple individuals to file false PUA applications with 
SWAs in multiple states and territories, including Ohio, California, Guam, and 
others; 
b. O. DIANE possessed PUA debit cards issued by SWAs in the names of other 
individuals; 
5 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 5 of 12  PAGEID #: 21

c. D. DIANE possessed and used PUA debit cards issued as a result of fraudulent 
PUA applications submitted by her brother, O. DIANE. 
All in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. 
COUNTS 3-4 
(Aggravated Identity Theft, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(a)(1) & (b)(2)) 
18. 
On or about the dates set forth below, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
OUSMANE DIANE did knowingly possess and use, without lawful authority, a means of 
identification of another person during and in relation to a felony violation enumerated in 18 U.S.C. 
§ 1028A(c), to wit, conspiracy to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, as charged 
in Count 2, knowing that the means of identification belonged to another actual person. 
Count 
Approximate Date 
Means of Identification 
3 
10/09/2020 
Name, DOB, & SSN of D.T. 
on PUA application 
4 
01/22/2021 
Name, DOB, & SSN of B.E. 
on PUA application 
All in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(a)(1) & (b)(2). 
COUNTS 5-6 
(Aggravated Identity Theft, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(a)(1) & (b)(2)) 
19. 
On or about the dates set forth below, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
DIABA DIANE did knowingly possess and use, without lawful authority, a means of 
identification of another person during and in relation to a felony violation enumerated in 18 U.S.C. 
§ 1028A(c), to wit, conspiracy to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, as charged 
in Count 2, knowing that the means of identification belonged to another actual person. 
Count 
Approximate Date 
Means of Identification 
5 
06/29/2021 
Name of C.A. on PUA debit card 
6 
06/29/2021 
Name of S.M. on PUA debit card 
All in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(a)(1) & (b)(2). 
6 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 6 of 12  PAGEID #: 22

COUNTS 7-8 
(Wire Fraud—PPP, 18 U.S.C. § 1343) 
20. 
Paragraphs 1 through 8 are incorporated here. 
21. 
Blueacorn, with headquarters in Arizona, was a third-party participating lender in 
the PPP. Blueacorn disbursed PPP funds through an account held at Happy State Bank. 
22. 
MAMADOU DIAW had ownership and control over and was a signatory for an 
account at Fifth Third Bank ending x4109. 
The Scheme 
23. 
From on or about March 19, 2021 and continuing thereafter until on or about April 
6, 2021, in the Southern District of Ohio and elsewhere, defendant MAMADOU DIAW devised, 
intended to devise, and knowingly participated in a scheme to defraud in order to deprive another 
of money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and 
promises; that is, he submitted a false PPP application. 
24. 
It was part of the scheme that: 
a. On or about March 20, 2021, DIAW submitted a fraudulent PPP application to 
Blueacorn in the name of a purported construction business. 
b. With his PPP application, DIAW submitted a fake 2019 IRS Form Schedule C for 
the purported construction business. 
c. DIAW received PPP funds of approximately $20,415, on or about April 1, 2021, 
in his Fifth Third account ending x4109; 
d. DIAW withdrew $20,400 in cash from this account in four transactions between 
April 2 and April 6 of 2021. 
25. 
On or about the dates set forth below, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
MAMADOU DIAW, for the purpose of executing the scheme described above, and attempting to 
7 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 7 of 12  PAGEID #: 23

do so, caused to be transmitted by means of wire communication in interstate commerce the 
following signals and sounds: 
Count 
Approximate Date 
Wire Communication 
7 
03/20/21 
Online filing of fraudulent 
PPP application 
8 
03/26/21 
Online signature of PPP loan 
documents 
All in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. 
COUNT 9 
(Passing, Uttering, or Publishing Stolen Treasury Checks, 18 U.S.C. §§ 510(a)(2) & 2) 
26. 
On or about August 19, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant ESCO 
DAVIS, with intent to defraud, did pass, utter, publish, and aid and abet the passing, uttering, and 
publishing, as true a Treasury check of the United States, with a face value of $1,200, bearing a 
falsely made and forged endorsement, the said check being Number 33700977 over Symbol 
Number 4041 and dated May 22, 2020. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 510(a)(2) and 2. 
COUNT 10 
(Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 & 2) 
27. 
On or about August 19, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant ESCO 
DAVIS willfully and knowingly stole, purloined, and converted to his use or the use of another, 
and aided and abetted another in willfully and knowingly stealing, purloining, and converting to 
his use or the use of another, goods and property of the United States of a value exceeding $1,000, 
that is, the depositing into a bank account controlled by ESCO DAVIS of a Treasury check of the 
United States with a face value of $1,200, the said check being Number 33700977 over Symbol 
Number 4041 and dated May 22, 2020. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2. 
8 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 8 of 12  PAGEID #: 24

COUNT 11 
(Passing, Uttering, or Publishing Stolen Treasury Checks, 18 U.S.C. §§ 510(a)(2) & 2) 
28. 
On or about September 9, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
MOHAMED DIAKITE, with intent to defraud, did pass, utter, publish, and aid and abet the 
passing, uttering, and publishing, as true a Treasury check of the United States, with a face value 
of $2,706.75, bearing a falsely made and forged endorsement, the said check being Number 
16787462 over Symbol Number 4039 and dated August 26, 2022. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 510(a)(2) and 2. 
COUNT 12 
(Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 & 2) 
29. 
On or about September 9, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
MOHAMED DIAKITE willfully and knowingly stole, purloined, and converted to his use or the 
use of another, and aided and abetted another in willfully and knowingly stealing, purloining, and 
converting to his use or the use of another, goods and property of the United States of a value 
exceeding $1,000, that is, the depositing into a bank account controlled by MOHAMED 
DIAKITE of a Treasury check of the United States with a face value of $2,706.75, the said check 
being Number 16787462 over Symbol Number 4039 and dated August 26, 2022. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2. 
COUNT 13 
(Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 & 2) 
30. 
On or about August 17, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
MOHAMED DIAKITE willfully and knowingly stole, purloined, and converted to his use or the 
use of another, and aided and abetted another in willfully and knowingly stealing, purloining, and 
converting to his use or the use of another, goods and property of the United States of a value 
9 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 9 of 12  PAGEID #: 25

exceeding $1,000, that is, the depositing into a bank account controlled by MOHAMED 
DIAKITE of a Treasury check of the United States with a face value of $1,025.25, the said check 
being Number 33702656 over Symbol Number 4041 and dated May 22, 2020. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2. 
COUNT 14 
(Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 & 2) 
31. 
On or about August 18, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
MOHAMED DIAKITE willfully and knowingly stole, purloined, and converted to his use or the 
use of another, and aided and abetted another in willfully and knowingly stealing, purloining, and 
converting to his use or the use of another, goods and property of the United States of a value 
exceeding $1,000, that is, the depositing into a bank account controlled by MOHAMED 
DIAKITE of a Treasury check of the United States with a face value of $1,065.80, the said check 
being Number 33737064 over Symbol Number 4041 and dated May 22, 2020. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2. 
COUNT 15 
(Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 & 2) 
32. 
On or about August 18, 2020, in the Southern District of Ohio, defendant 
MAMADOU DIAW willfully and knowingly stole, purloined, and converted to his use or the use 
of another, and aided and abetted another in willfully and knowingly stealing, purloining, and 
converting to his use or the use of another, goods and property of the United States of a value 
exceeding $1,000, that is, the depositing into a bank account controlled by MAMADOU DIAW 
of a Treasury check of the United States with a face value of $1,200.00, the said check being 
Number 33714847 over Symbol Number 4041 and dated May 22, 2020. 
In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2. 
10 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 10 of 12  PAGEID #: 26

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION 
33. 
The allegations of this Indictment are realleged and by this reference fully 
incorporated herein for the purpose of alleging forfeitures to the United States of America. 
34. 
Upon conviction of the any offense alleged in this Indictment, the defendants, 
OUSMANE DIANE, DIABA DIANE, ESCO DAVIS, MOHAMED DIAKITE, MAMADOU 
DIAW, ISSIAH DOOLEY, and LAMINE KOMARA, shall forfeit to the United States: 
a. Any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds 
traceable to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 and/or 18 U.S.C. § 1343, or a conspiracy 
to commit such violation, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 
U.S.C. § 2461(c); and/or 
b. Any property constituting, or derived from, proceeds obtained directly or indirectly, 
as a result of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 510, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 
§ 982(a)(2)(B)• 
35. 
If any of the forfeitable property described above, as a result of any act or omission 
of a defendant: 
a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence; 
b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third parry; 
c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court; 
d. has been substantially diminished in value; or 
e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without 
difficulty; 
it is the intent of the United States of America, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated 
by 18 U.S.C. § 982(b)(1) and/or 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), to seek forfeiture of any other property of 
the defendants up to the value of the forfeitable property. 
11 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 11 of 12  PAGEID #: 27

DAVID J. TWOMB 
I 1 2558) 
Assistant United 
at Attorney 
Forfeiture notice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), 18 
U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(B), and Rule 32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 
A TRUE BILL. 
s/ Foreperson 
FOREPERSON 
KENNETH L. PARKER 
United States Attorney 
12 
Case: 2:23-cr-00037-MHW Doc #: 10 Filed: 02/14/23 Page: 12 of 12  PAGEID #: 28

File and source

File

doc-010-2023-02-14-Indictment.pdf

Size

751,630 bytes

SHA-256

b9673274cafbb4e0a79cfa2c0516b363295cb40fe3a987d328f0e038c92c377a

Our copy

doc-010-2023-02-14-Indictment.pdf

Original

No public link identified.