Information — United States v. Christina Burden (Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document 15)

Summary

A criminal information filed September 14, 2021 as Document 15 in United States v. Christina Burden, Case No. 4:21-cr-00362-YGR, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland Division, with its cover sheet. Acting U.S. Attorney Stephanie M. Hinds and Assistant U.S. Attorney Abraham Fine charge two counts of bank fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1344(2)) and two counts of money laundering (18 U.S.C. § 1957), with a forfeiture allegation; the complainant agencies are the IRS and FBI. After describing the CARES Act and the Paycheck Protection Program, it alleges that Burden sought more than $4.6 million in PPP and EIDL loans for entities she controlled and obtained more than $1.1 million, including $150,900 disbursed to her personal bank account on or about June 16, 2020.

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

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

AO 257 (Rev. 6/78)

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document 15

DEFENDANT INFORMATION RELATIVE TO A CRIMINAL ACTION - IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT

By: L_] COMPLAINT INFORMATION [_] INDICTMENT
L_] SUPERSEDING

-_—— OFFENSE CHARGED

Counts 1-2: 18 U.S.C. 1344 - Bank Fraud [_] Petty
Counts 3-4: 18 U.S.C. 1957 - Money Laundering L | Minor
Misde-
LJ meanor
Felony

PENALTY: 18U.S.C. 1344: 30 years imprisonment; $1,000,000 fine; 3 years
supervised release; forfeiture; $100 special assessment per count.
18 U.S.C. 1957: 10 years imprisonment; $250,000 fine; 3 years
supervised release; forfeiture; $100 special assessment per count.

Name of District Court, and/or Judge/Magistrate Location

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

(— DEFENDANT - U.S

FILED

Sep 14 2021

) Christina Burden

DISTRICT COURT NUMBER
4:21-cr-00362-YGR

SUSAN Y. SOONG
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND

DEFENDANT

PROCEEDING

Name of Complaintant Agency, or Person (& Title, if any)

IRS and FBI

person is awaiting trial in another Federal or State Court,
LJ give name of court

this person/proceeding is transferred from another district
LJ per (circle one) FRCrp 20, 21, or 40. Show District

this is a reprosecution of
charges previously dismissed

LJ which were dismissed on motion SHOW
of: DOCKET NO.
[| U.S. ATTORNEY [| DEFENSE
this prosecution relates to a
pending case involving this same
defendant MAGISTRATE

CASE NO.

prior proceedings or appearance(s)

before U.S. Magistrate regarding this 21-mj-70194

defendant were recorded under

Name and Office of Person

Furnishing Information on this form Stephanie M. Hinds

[x] U.S. Attorney [] Other U.S. Agency

Name of Assistant U.S.

Attorney (if assigned) Abraham Fine

IS NOT IN CUSTODY
Has not been arrested, pending outcome this proceeding.
1) L | If not detained give date any prior
summons was served on above charges d

2) [_] sa Fugitive

3) Is on Bail or Release from (show District)
N.D.C.A.

IS INCUSTODY
4) |] On this charge

5) [_] On another conviction

} [ | Federal [ ] State
6) [_] Awaiting trial on other charges

If answer to (6) is "Yes", show name of institution

If "Yes"
} give date

Has detainer L_] Yes

been filed? CO No filed
DATE OF ) Month/Day/Year
ARREST

Or... if Arresting Agency & Warrant were not

DATE TRANSFERRED Month/Day/Year
TO U.S. CUSTODY

PROCESS:
[|] SUMMONS NO PROCESS* [_] WARRANT

If Summons, complete following:
[_] Arraignment [_] Initial Appearance

Defendant Address:

Comments:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS

Date/Time:

[| This report amends AO 257 previously submitted

Bail Amount:

* Where defendant previously apprehended on complaint, no new summons or
warrant needed, since Magistrate has scheduled arraignment

Before Judge:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document15 Filed 09/14/21 Page 2of11

STEPHANIE M. HINDS (CABN 154284)
Acting United States Attorney FILED

Sep 14 2021

SUSAN Y. SOONG
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CASE NO. 4:21-cr-00362-YGR

VIOLATIONS:

18 U.S.C. § 1344(2) — Bank Fraud;

18 U.S.C. § 1957 — Engaging in Monetary
Transactions in Property Derived from Specified
Unlawful Activity

18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), (b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. §
2461(c) — Forfeiture Allegation

Plaintiff,

Vv.
CHRISTINA BURDEN,

Defendant.

OAKLAND VENUE

INFORMATION

The United States Attorney charges:

Introductory Allegations

At all times relevant to this Information:

1. Defendant CHRISTINA BURDEN resided in the Northern District of California, among
other places.

2. Burden Consulting Group LLC was an entity organized with the California Secretary of
State on or about January 13, 2020.

3. Blessing Box Co LLC was an entity organized with the California Secretary of State on
or about April 24, 2020.

4. Defendant CHRISTINA BURDEN served as the authorized representative and either

INFORMATION 1
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document15 Filed 09/14/21 Page 3of11

owner or founder of Burden Consulting Group LLC and Blessing Box Co LLC (together the “Burden

The Small Business Administration and the CARES Act

5. The United States 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.

6. As part of this effort, the SBA enabled and provided for loans through banks, credit
unions, and other lenders that had government-backed guarantees. The SBA also provided direct loans.

7. In or around March 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(“CARES”) Act was enacted to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of Americans
suffering adverse economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES Act established
several new temporary programs and provided for expansion of others, including programs created
and/or administered by the SBA.

The Paycheck Protection Program

8. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of up to $349
billion in forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a
program referred to as the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). In or around April 2020, Congress
authorized over $300 billion in additional PPP funding. The CARES Act required a business to be have
been in operation before February 15, 2020, to be eligible for PPP loans.

9. In order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required 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 in order to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan. In the PPP loan
application, the small business (through its authorized representative) was required to state, among other
things, its: (i) average monthly payroll expenses; and (ii) number of employees. These figures were used

to calculate the amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the PPP. In addition,

INFORMATION 2
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

businesses applying for a PPP loan were required to provide documentation showing their payroll
expenses.

10. A PPP loan application was required to be processed by a participating financial
institution (“lender”). If a PPP loan application was approved, the lender funded the PPP loan using its
own moneys, which were 100% guaranteed by the SBA. Data from the application, including
information about the borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of employees, was
transmitted by the lender to the SBA in the course of processing the loan.

11. PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain permissible
expenses: payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The PPP allowed the interest and
principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on these expense
items within a designated period of time after receiving the proceeds and used a certain amount of
the PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

The Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program

12. The Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) program was an SBA program that
provided low-interest financing to small businesses, renters, and homeowners in regions affected by
declared disasters.

13. The CARES Act authorized the SBA to provide EIDLs to eligible small businesses
experiencing substantial financial disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the CARES
Act authorized the SBA to issue advances of up to $10,000 to small businesses. The amount of the
advance was determined by the number of employees the applicant certified having. The advances did
not have to be repaid.

14. —_ In order to obtain an EIDL and advance, a qualifying business was required to submit an
application to the SBA and provide information about its operations, such as the number of employees,
gross revenue for the 12-month period preceding the disaster, and cost of goods sold in the 12-month
period preceding the disaster. In the case of EIDLs for COVID-19 relief, the 12-month period was that
preceding January 31, 2020. The applicant was also required to certify that all of the information in the
application was true and correct to the best of the applicant’s knowledge.

15. | EIDL applications were submitted directly to the SBA and processed by the agency with

INFORMATION 3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

support from a government contractor, Rapid Finance. The amount of the loan, if the application was
approved, was determined based, in part, on the information provided in the application concerning the
number of employees, gross revenue, and cost of goods, as described above. Any funds issued under an
EIDL or advance were issued directly by the SBA. EIDL funds were permitted to be used for payroll
expenses, sick leave, production costs, and business obligations, such as debts, rent, and mortgage
payments. If the applicant also obtained a loan under the PPP, the EIDL funds were not permitted to be
used for the same purpose as the PPP funds.

Relevant Financial Institutions and Related Entities

16. FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY A is a financial technology company that
partnered with FINANCIAL INSTITUTION A to process PPP loan applications. FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION A is a financial institution, as that term is defined in Title 18, United States Code,
Section 20, the deposits of which were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”),
and is located in Salt Lake City, Utah. FINANCIAL INSTITUTION A participated in the PPP as a
lender and, as such, was authorized to lend funds to eligible borrowers under the terms of the PPP.

17. FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY B is a financial technology company that
partnered with FINANCIAL INSTITUTION B to process PPP loan applications. FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION B is a financial institution, as that term is defined in Title 18, United States Code,
Section 20, the deposits of which were insured by the FDIC, and is located in Fort Lee, New Jersey.
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION B participated in the SBA’s PPP as a lender and, as such, was authorized
to lend funds to eligible borrowers under the terms of the PPP.

18. FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C is a financial institution, as that term is defined in Title
18, United States Code, Section 20, the deposits of which were insured by the FDIC, and is located in
Vienna, Virginia. At all times relevant to this Information, BURDEN maintained an account at
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C in which she received the loan proceeds described in this Information.

The Scheme to Defraud

19. Beginning at a date unknown, but no later than April 2020, and continuing through
approximately October 2020, BURDEN devised a scheme and artifice to defraud by submitting and

causing to be submitted false and fraudulent loan applications to FFNANCIAL TECHNOLOGY

INFORMATION 4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPANY B and FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY A in order to obtain funds through the
PPP from FINANCIAL INSTITUTION B and FINANCIAL INSTITUTION A, and by submitting false
and fraudulent loan applications to the SBA to obtain funds through the EIDL program, as described
further below.

Manner and Means

20. The objective of BURDEN’s scheme was to obtain funds for personal use by submitting
fraudulent loan applications for PPP and EIDL funds.

21. As part of the scheme to defraud, BURDEN sought more than $4.6 million in PPP and
EIDL loans for the Burden Entities and actually obtained more than $1.1 million in loan proceeds on
behalf of those entities. BURDEN submitted these loan applications to FFNANCIAL TECHNOLOGY
COMPANY A, FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY B, and the SBA, and obtained loans from
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION A, FINANCIAL INSTITUTION B, and the SBA.

EIDL Application to the SBA

22. On or about April 7, 2020, BURDEN submitted an EIDL application for $150,900 to the
SBA, on behalf of Burden Consulting Group. On the application, BURDEN falsely listed Burden
Consulting Group’s gross revenues for the twelve-month period prior to January 31, 2020, as $856,000
and its cost of goods sold for the same period as $121,000.

23. The loan was approved, and $150,900 was disbursed to BURDEN’s personal Bank
Account on or about June 16, 2020.

PPP Loan Application to FNANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY A and FINANCIAL

INSTITUTION A

24. On or about May 16, 2020, BURDEN signed a PPP loan application for $307,916 that
was submitted on behalf of Burden Consulting Group to FFNANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY A.
BURDEN listed her title as "Owner" with 100% ownership. On Form 2483 of the application,
BURDEN falsely certified that she is not an owner of any other business, nor does she have common
management with any other business.

25. On the application, through the placement of her initials, BURDEN falsely certified that

Burden Consulting Group had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll taxes or paid

INFORMATION 5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document15 - Filed 09/14/21 Page 7 of 11

independent contractors.

26. On the application, Burden Consulting Group falsely listed an average monthly payroll of
$123,166.60 with 15 employees.

27. To support the loan application, BURDEN submitted a fraudulent document purporting
to be Burden Consulting Group’s 2019 IRS Form 941. Form 941 is an Employer’s Quarterly Federal
Tax Return. Burden Consulting Group has never filed an IRS Form 941.

28. To support the loan application, BURDEN submitted a fraudulent document purporting
to be a FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C bank statement for a Burden Consulting Group business
account.

29. The loan was approved and $307,916 was disbursed from FINANCIAL INSTITUTION
A to BURDEN’s personal FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C Account on or about May 28, 2020.

PPP Loan Application to FNANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY B and FINANCIAL

INSTITUTION B

30. | Onor about June 20, 2020, BURDEN signed a PPP loan application for $684,375 that
was submitted on behalf of Blessing Box to FFNANCIAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY B. On the
application, BURDEN is listed as the owner (with 90% of the equity) and the business’s address is listed
as BURDEN’s apartment in Oakland, California. On the application, BURDEN falsely stated that she is
not an owner of any other business, nor does she have common management with any other business.

31. On the application, through the placement of her initials, BURDEN falsely certified that
Blessing Box had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll taxes or paid independent contractors.

32. | BURDEN falsely listed Blessing Box’s average monthly payroll as $273,750 with 89
employees on the application.

33. To support the application, BURDEN submitted a fraudulent document purporting to be a
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C bank statement for Blessing Box’s business FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION Account for a statement period of February 1, 2020 to February 31, 2020.

34. To further support the loan application, BURDEN submitted documents purporting to be
Blessing Box’s IRS Forms 940 and W-3 for 2019. Form 940 is an employer’s annual federal

unemployment tax return. Form W-3 is a summary for the Social Security Administration of all the

INFORMATION 6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document15 - Filed 09/14/21 Page 8of11

business’ employee wages and contributions for the previous year. Both documents falsely reported the
total compensation paid in 2019 was $8,900,000 to 89 employees. In fact, Blessing Box never filed a
Form 940 with the IRS and never submitted a Form W-3.

35. The loan was approved and $684,375 was disbursed from FINANCIAL INSTITUTION
B to BURDEN’s personal FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C FINANCIAL INSTITUTION Account on or
about July 7, 2020.
COUNTS ONE AND TWO: (18 U.S.C. § 1344 (2) — Bank Fraud)

36. The factual allegations in paragraphs | through 35 are re-alleged and incorporated herein
as if set forth in full.

37. | Onor about the dates set forth in the separate counts below, in the Northern District of
California and elsewhere, the defendant,

CHRISTINA BURDEN,

having knowingly and with the intent to defraud devised and executed, and attempted to execute, a
scheme and artifice to defraud a financial institution and to obtain moneys, funds, credits, assets, and
other property that were then under the custody and control of financial institutions, by means of
materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, and by concealment of material

facts, did knowingly engage in the following transactions:

Approximate
Date of Financial Amount
Application Company Name Program | Institution Sought
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION
1 | 05/16/2020 BURDEN CONSULTING GROUP LLC PPP A $307,916
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION
2 | 06/20/2020 BLESSING BOX CO LLC PPP B $684,375

Each in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1344(2).

COUNTS THREE AND FOUR: (18 U.S.C. § 1957 — Engaging in Monetary Transactions in
Property Derived from Specified Unlawful Activity)

38. The factual allegations in paragraphs | through 37 of this Information are re-alleged and

incorporated as if fully set forth here.

INFORMATION 7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

39. Among other transactions, on or about July 17, 2020 and August 5, 2020, in the Northern
District of California and elsewhere in the United States, the defendant,
CHRISTINA BURDEN,
did knowingly engage in a monetary transaction by, through, and to a financial institution, in and
affecting interstate and foreign commerce, in criminally derived property of a value greater than
$10,000, specifically, the transactions shown in the chart below, such funds having been derived from

the specified unlawful activity of bank fraud.

Financial
Date Description Amount Institution
FINANCIAL
07/17/2020 | Private Jet Travel $61,992.36 | INSTITUTION C
FINANCIAL
08/05/2020 | Private Jet Travel $14,401.00 | INSTITUTION C

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957.

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION: (18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) & 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) — Criminal
Forfeiture)

40. All of the allegations contained in this Information are re-alleged and by this reference
fully incorporated herein for the purpose of alleging forfeiture pursuant to the provisions of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and (b)(1) and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c).

41. | Upona conviction for the offenses alleged in Counts One and Two of this Information,
the defendant,

CHRISTINA BURDEN,

shall forfeit to the United States pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and (b)(1) and 28 U.S.C.
§ 2461(c) all property constituting, and derived from, proceeds the defendant obtained directly and
indirectly, as the result of those violations, including, but not limited to, the following specific property:

a. $4,670.12 seized from a FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C Account bearing an
account number ending in 7565;

INFORMATION 8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document15 - Filed 09/14/21 Page 10 of 11

b. $8,372.60, seized from FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C Account bearing an
account number ending in 0717;

C. $2.05 seized from a FINANCIAL INSTITUTION C Account bearing an account
number ending in 8423;

d. $452.77 seized from a University Federal Credit Union Account bearing an

account number ending in 1391;

e. $2.86 seized from a BBVA Compass Account bearing an account number ending
in 9795;

f. $37,915.30 seized from a Bank of America Account bearing an account number
ending in 7378;

g. A $35,000.00 BBVA Compass Cashier’s check bearing check number
0505032935, payable to “Merritt on 3,” held by the FPI Property Management firm;

h. A 2020 Mercedes Benz, VIN XXXXXXXXXXXXX 7154;

i. A 2020 Nissan Altima, VIN XXXXXXXXXXXXX 8337;

j. $78,069.83 in U.S. Currency, as substitution for a 2020 Land Rover Range Rover
Sport, VIN XXXXXXXXXXXXX5629; and

k. Any and all apparel seized from BURDEN’s Chicago residence, located on East

Wacker Drive.

42. If any of the aforementioned property, as a result of any act or omission of defendant —
a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third person;

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 that cannot be divided without difficulty;

any and all interest the defendant has in other property shall be vested in the United States and

INFORMATION 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:21-cr-00362-YGR Document15 _ Filed 09/14/21 Page 11 of 11

forfeited to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853p, as incorporated by 18 U.S.C. § 982(b)(1).
All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and (b)(1), Title 28, United

States Code, Section 2461(c), and Rule 32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

DATED: September 14, 2021 STEPHANIE M. HINDS
Acting United States Attorney

L[ Utwaham Fine
ABRAHAM FINE
Assistant United States Attorney

INFORMATION 10


File and source

File

15-information-as-to-christina-burden-1-count-s-1-2-3-and-4-att.pdf

Size

348,150 bytes

SHA-256

c519b16d0afa2138533d30b8906b499ee51d4727c38787c008c4b21cf41f635a

Our copy

15-information-as-to-christina-burden-1-count-s-1-2-3-and-4-att.pdf

Original

No public link identified.