Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents complaint against, and arrest warrants for, Stephen GLOVER (year

complaint against, and arrest warrants for, Stephen GLOVER (year

Date
2022-05-13

Summary

An affidavit filed May 13, 2022 as Document 1 in Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB, by a Department of Labor Office of Inspector General special agent, supporting a criminal complaint and arrest warrants against Stephen Glover and Travis McKenzie for mail fraud under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341. The affidavit describes an investigation into Pandemic Unemployment Assistance claims under the CARES Act. It alleges that Glover, a U.S. Postal Service mail carrier, and McKenzie caused more than 50 EDD debit cards containing approximately $800,000 in COVID-related UI benefits to be mailed to addresses primarily along Glover's route. It states that searches in May and June 2021 seized more than 200 pieces of stolen mail and EDD-related mail and debit cards. The 46-page affidavit was attested by telephone before United States Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick.

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

Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 1 of 46 Page ID #:1
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 2 of 46 Page ID #:2




                           A F F I D A V I T
     I, Jeffrey Wolf, being duly sworn, declare and state as

follows:

                        I. PURPOSE OF AFFIDAVIT

           I make this affidavit in support of a criminal

complaint against, and arrest warrants for, Stephen GLOVER (year

of birth: 1989) and Travis McKENZIE (year of birth: 1996) for

violating Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341 (Mail

Fraud).

           The facts set forth in this affidavit are based upon

my personal observations, my review of the documents and records

discussed herein, my training and experience, and information

obtained from other agents and witnesses.         This affidavit is

intended to show merely that there is sufficient probable cause

for the requested complaint and arrest warrants and does not

purport to set forth all of my knowledge of or investigation

into this matter.     Unless specifically indicated otherwise, all

conversations and statements described in this affidavit are

related in substance and in part only.

            II. BACKGROUND OF SPECIAL AGENT JEFFREY WOLF

           I am a Special Agent (SA) with the United States

Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General (DOL-OIG), and

have served in this capacity for a year and a half.           I am

presently assigned to the Los Angeles Regional Office.           My

responsibilities as a DOL-OIG SA include investigating

Unemployment Insurance (UI) fraud, mail fraud, identity theft,

and other related crimes.      I am a graduate of the Federal Law
                                     1
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 3 of 46 Page ID #:3




Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Glynco, Georgia.           As part

of the training provided at FLETC, I successfully completed the

Basic Training course, which included, but was not limited to,

courses in criminal and constitutional law.         Additionally, I

have completed the Inspector General Academy at FLETC in Glynco,

Georgia.   Before my employment with DOL-OIG, I was employed for

five years as an investigator for the DOL, Office of Labor

Management Standards, responsible for conducting civil and

criminal investigations.      I also served on active duty with the

United States Coast Guard for more than 13 years, and more than

nine years with the United States Coast Guard Reserve.
           Through my training and experience, including

discussions with other law enforcement officers experienced in

investigating crimes involving UI and benefits fraud, I have

become familiar with the methods used by people who commit

benefits fraud offenses.

                    III. SUMMARY OF PROBABLE CAUSE

           The DOL-OIG, United States Postal Service - Office of

Inspector General (USPS-OIG), California Employment Development

Department (EDD), and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s

Department (LASD) have been investigating a fraudulent scheme in

which perpetrators fraudulently apply for and obtain UI benefits

under the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) provisions of

the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security

(CARES) Act, a provision that was designed to help unemployed

individuals obtain UI benefits as part of the nation’s response

to the economic harms caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
                                     2
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 4 of 46 Page ID #:4




            Federal and state law enforcement uncovered and

investigated an unemployment insurance fraud, identity theft,

and mail fraud scheme perpetrated by McKENZIE and GLOVER in 2020

and 2021.   GLOVER was a U.S. Postal Service mail carrier at the

time and abused his position to further the fraudulent scheme.

            When interviewed, both McKENZIE and GLOVER confessed

to engaging in a scheme to defraud EDD, which included using EDD

debit cards in other people’s names to withdraw thousands of

dollars in cash from ATMs.      GLOVER also admitted that to execute

the fraudulent scheme, he used his position as a U.S. Postal

Service mail carrier to assist McKENZIE (who lived on GLOVER’s

mail route) with intercepting, stealing, and possessing U.S.

Mail intended for others.      In addition to stealing EDD-related

mail, GLOVER also admitted to stealing personal and business

checks from the U.S. mail.

            During the execution of search warrants at the

residences of McKENZIE, GLOVER, and GLOVER’s girlfriend in May

and June 2021, law enforcement discovered and seized

credit/debit cards in the names of other people, many of which

had been issued by state workforce agencies such as California

EDD and Virginia’s Employment Commission.         The searches also

revealed large volumes of stolen mail, including personal and

business checks intended for third parties.         In total, more than

200 pieces of stolen mail and EDD-related mail and debit cards

were seized during the searches.
            Subsequent investigation also uncovered that McKENZIE,

his girlfriend, and GLOVER worked in concert to create fake EDD
                                     3
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 5 of 46 Page ID #:5




profiles and apply for COVID-related UI benefits, often using

stolen identities, with mailing addresses on GLOVER’s route that

GLOVER had provided.
           Thus far, the investigation has uncovered that in

their fraudulent scheme, GLOVER and McKENZIE, together with

other co-schemers, fraudulently caused more than 50 EDD debit

cards containing approximately $800,000 in COVID-related UI

benefits to be mailed to addresses primarily along GLOVER’s mail

route, including McKENZIE’s residence, which were then used to

withdraw cash, transfer funds, or for personal expenditures.

                   IV. STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSE

     A.    Background on Unemployment Insurance Benefits

           Since 1935, the U.S. Department of Labor’s UI program

has provided unemployment benefits to eligible workers who

become unemployed through no fault of their own.          This program

ensures that at least a significant portion of the necessities

of life -- most notably food, shelter, and clothing -- are met

on a weekly basis while the worker seeks employment.           UI

beneficiaries who meet the requirements of the applicable state

law are eligible for this temporary financial assistance.            Each

state administers a separate UI program within the guidelines

established by Federal law.      In the state of California, EDD

administers the UI program for residents and others physically

performing work activities in California.

           Generally speaking, regular UI claimants must be:

(1) unemployed through no fault of their own; (2) able and

available for work; (3) willing to accept suitable work; and
                                     4
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 6 of 46 Page ID #:6




(4) actively seeking work.

     B.     Pandemic Unemployment Assistance under the federal
            CARES Act

            On March 13, 2020, the President of the United States

declared COVID-19 to be an emergency under the Robert T.

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.           As a

result, Congress passed the CARES Act, which the President

signed into law on March 27, 2020.        The CARES Act provides over

$2 trillion in economic relief protections to the American

people for the public health and economic impacts of COVID-19.

            Prior to the enactment of the CARES Act, to be

eligible for UI administered by EDD, a person must have been

employed and worked in California and received at least a

certain amount of wages from an employer in the 18 months

preceding his/her UI benefits claim.        Because of this

requirement, self-employed workers, independent contractors, and

employees with insufficient earnings were not eligible to

receive regular UI benefits.

            The CARES Act established a new program – PUA – to

provide unemployment benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic to

people who do not qualify for regular unemployment insurance

benefits, including business owners, self-employed workers,

independent contractors, and those with a limited work history

who are out of business or have significantly reduced their

services as a direct result of the pandemic.         UI benefits

provided under the PUA program are sometimes referred to as PUA

benefits.
                                     5
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 7 of 46 Page ID #:7




           Under the PUA provisions of the CARES Act, a person

who is a business owner, self-employed worker, independent

contractor, or gig worker can qualify for PUA benefits

administered by EDD if s/he previously performed such work in

California and is unemployed, partially unemployed, unable to

work, or unavailable to work due to a COVID-19-related reason. 1

Examples of non-business-owner occupations that may qualify a

person for PUA benefits are realtor, barber, hairstylist,

freelance photographer, construction handyman/woman, gardener,

and ride-share driver. 2

           California EDD began accepting applications for PUA

benefits on or about April 28, 2020.        To make benefits available

as quickly as possible, payments are issued in phases.           If a


     1 COVID-19 related reasons for being out of work include:
being diagnosed with COVID-19 or experiencing symptoms of COVID-
19 and seeking a medical diagnosis; being unable to work because
a health care provider advised self-quarantining due to concerns
related to COVID-19; having a household member who has been
diagnosed with COVID-19; providing care for a family or
household member who has been diagnosed with COVID-19; having
primary caregiving responsibility for a child or other household
member who is unable to attend school or another facility that
is closed as a direct result of the COVID-19 and the school or
facility care is required for the claimant to work; becoming the
breadwinner or major support for a household because the head of
household died due to COVID-19; the claimant has quit his/her
job due to COVID-19; the place of employment has closed due to
COVID-19; a job that the claimant was scheduled to start is no
longer available due to the COVID-19 public health emergency; or
the place of employment is inaccessible due to the COVID-19
public health emergency.
     2 To be eligible, such person must also not be participating
in the UI Elective Coverage program. Under the provisions of
the California Unemployment Insurance Code (CUIC), employers may
elect UI and State Disability Insurance (SDI) or only Disability
Insurance (DI) coverage for themselves. Self-employed
individuals, who are not employers, may only elect SDI coverage
for themselves.
                                     6
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 8 of 46 Page ID #:8




claimant qualifies for PUA benefits, the minimum payments are as

follows based on the claim’s start date:

           Phase 1: For claims with start dates from February 2
           to March 28, 2020, $167 per week for each week the

           claimant is unemployed due to COVID-19.

           Phase 2: For claims with start dates from March 29 to

           July 25, 2020, $167 plus $600 per week for each week

           the claimant is unemployed due to COVID-19.

           Phase 3: For claims with start dates from July 26 to

           December 26, 2020, $167 per week for each week the

           claimant is unemployed due to COVID-19.

           Phase 4: Phase 4: For claims with start dates from

           December 27, 2020, to the end of the program (which

           ended on September 4, 2021), $167 plus $300 per week

           for each week the claimant is unemployed due to COVID-

           19. Claimant may qualify for PUA benefits for up to a

           total for up to a total of 57 weeks (minus any regular

           UI and FED/ED benefits received). PUA benefits ended

           September 4, 2021. The last day one could apply for a

           PUA claim was October 6, 2021, for the weeks of

           unemployment before September 4, 2021.

           PUA applicants may be eligible for more than the

minimum weekly benefit amount of $167 if their annual income for

2019 reported on the PUA application meets a minimum threshold.

           A UI claimant can usually collect 26 weeks of regular

state UI benefits.     The CARES Act provides for additional

Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC), which
                                     7
  Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 9 of 46 Page ID #:9




provides up to 13 weeks of additional payments, for a total of

39 weeks of benefits.     PEUC is available to persons who were or

are fully or partially unemployed at any time between from March

29 through December 26, 2020.       Persons with a regular UI claim,

a PUA claim or a PEUC extension filed between March 29 and July

25, 2020, also receive Federal Pandemic Unemployment

Compensation (“FPUC”), which is the extra $600 per week.
           On August 8, 2020, after FPUC expired, the President

of the United States signed a Presidential Memorandum

authorizing FEMA to use disaster relief funds pursuant to

Section 408 Other Needs Assistance of the Stafford Act to

provide supplemental payments for lost wages to help ease the

financial burden on individuals who were unemployed as a result

of COVID-19. The “Lost Wages 10 Assistance Program” (LWAP)

served as a temporary measure to provide an additional $300 per

week via a total of $44 billion in FEMA funds. The period of

assistance for LWAP was August 1, 2020, to December 27, 2020, or

termination of the program, whichever was sooner. On December

27, 2020, the President signed into law the Consolidated

Appropriations Act, 2021. The guidance provides states with

important information about several provisions of the law,

including the extension of programs first authorized by the

CARES Act earlier, as well as the creation of a new UI benefit

for “mixed earners.”

           The law extends the PUA program created by the CARES

Act, which provides UI benefits to gig workers and others not

traditionally eligible for them. Under the law, the end of the
                                     8
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 10 of 46 Page ID #:10




period of applicability for the PUA program extends to those

weeks of unemployment ending on or before March 14, 2021. In

states where the week of unemployment ends on a Sunday, the last

payable week of PUA is the week ending March 14, 2021 (March 13

if weeks of unemployment end on Saturday). For individuals on

PUA who have not exhausted their benefit eligibility of up to 50

weeks, the program also provides for continuing benefits for

eligible individuals for weeks of unemployment through April 5,

2021. The law also strengthens documentation requirements to

ensure PUA program integrity.
           Additionally, FPUC, which expired July 31, 2020, is

reauthorized and modified to provide $300 per week to supplement

benefits for weeks of unemployment beginning after December 26,

2020, and ending on or before March 14, 2021. FPUC is not

payable with respect to any week during the gap in

applicability, that is, weeks of unemployment ending after July

31, 2020, through weeks of unemployment ending on or before

December 26, 2020.

           On March 21, 2021, the President signed into law the

American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021. The law extended

certain programs first authorized by the CARES Act beyond the

expiration date of March 14, 2021, to September 6, 2021. FPUC,

which expired on March 14, 2021, was reauthorized to provide

$300 per week through the week ending on or before September 6,

2021.

           Persons applying for PUA benefits do not need to

submit any supporting documents to the EDD with their
                                     9
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 11 of 46 Page ID #:11




applications.     Claimants enter their total income for the 2019

calendar year on the application.        The stated income will be

used to pay the minimum benefits of $167 per week.           EDD may

request documentation to provide proof of the stated income. 3           If

the income information provided by the PUA claimant meets an

annual earnings threshold of $17,368 or more, the EDD will work

as quickly as possible to verify the claimant’s income using

other resources available to EDD in order to increase the PUA

weekly benefit amount.

             Like regular UI claims, PUA claims can be filed

online.     When an individual files a PUA claim online, EDD

automatically maintains certain information regarding the filing

of the claim.    This information includes the date and time the

claim was submitted, the name of the person for whom the claim

was filed, and the IP address of the computer, or ISP account,

that was used to file the claim.

             A PUA claimant must answer various questions to

establish his/her eligibility for PUA benefits.          The claimant

must provide his/her name, Social Security Number, and mailing

address.    The claimant must also identify a qualifying

occupational status and COVID-19 related reason for being out of

work.

             After it accepts a UI claim, including a claim

submitted pursuant to the PUA program, EDD typically deposits UI

funds every two weeks to an EBP debit card administered by the


       In general, EDD accepts items such as tax returns, IRS
        3
Forms 1099 and W-2, and paystubs as proof of income.
                                    10
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 12 of 46 Page ID #:12




BofA, which the claimant can use to pay for his/her expenses.

The EBP card is sent via the U.S. Postal Service to the claimant

at the address the claimant provides in their UI claim.

Claimants can activate their debit card over the phone or

online.
           When receiving regular UI benefits, a claimant must

complete a Continued Claim Form (DE 4581) and certify every two

weeks, under penalty of perjury, that he/she remains unemployed

and eligible to receive UI benefits.        EDD authorizes and

deposits payment to the EBP debit card after it receives the

Continued Claim Form.

           Weekly PUA benefits typically range from $40 to $450.

In order to receive the maximum weekly benefit of $450, a

claimant must have earned $11,674.01 or more in the highest

quarter of the claimant's base employment period.

           The submission of the PUA claims cause mailings to the

addresses provided on the claims, including mailings of

Electronic Benefit Payment (EBP) debit cards administered by

Bank of America (BofA) that are used to access UI benefits.            In

fraudulent claim schemes, co-schemers then use the EBP debit

cards to withdraw fraudulently obtained UI benefits by making

cash withdrawals at Automated Teller Machines and point of sale

(POS) purchases at merchants across the United States.

           Based on my training and experience, I know that

individuals scheming to fraudulently obtain UI benefits

generally follow recognizable patterns, including, among other

indicia:
                                    11
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 13 of 46 Page ID #:13




             a.   Co-schemers commonly buy or outright steal the

identities of other people to file for fraudulent UI benefits in

the ID-theft victims’ names and then collect the UI funds. Co-

schemers commonly withdraw UI benefits via ATMs or make POS

purchases at merchants for goods and services.

             b.   Using addresses the schemers control as the

addresses submitted to EDD for the claims so that EBP debit

cards and other EDD correspondence will be mailed to these

addresses and thus be accessible to the schemers.

             c.   Submitting multiple UI claims from the same IP

address for multiple claimants.       These claims are sometimes

submitted on the same day close in time.

             d.   Failing to provide a phone number or providing a

wrong number on multiple UI claims so it may be difficult to

reach the identity holder.

     C.      May 2021: Search of McKENZIE and his girlfriend’s
             residence

             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents who

have participated in this investigation, I am aware of the

following:

             a.   On or about May 19, 2021, the Honorable Suzette

Clover, Los Angeles County Superior Court, authorized and signed

a search warrant for the residence located at xx841 Arroyo Park

Drive, Apt. 812, Valencia, California 91355 (McKENZIE




                                    12
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 14 of 46 Page ID #:14




residence 4), and three persons, including McKENZIE.
           b.    On or about May 20, 2021, the LASD executed the

search warrant at the McKENZIE residence during which they

encountered McKENZIE and D.S.L. Following the search, McKENZIE

and D.S.L. were arrested by LASD. I have reviewed police

reports, evidence, and related items from the warrants executed

by LASD, from which I know the following:

           c.    During the search of the McKENZIE residence, the

following items were discovered:

                 i.    Over 170 pieces of EDD mail addressed to

more than 50 different names using the McKENZIE residence as

their purported mailing address, while other mailings contained

mailing addresses in Bakersfield, Fresno, Los Angeles, and

Torrance, California. The addressees on the mail included S.P.,

C.S., R.S., D.G., M.S., M.M., W.S., I.T., L.M., K.A., and J.T.

                 ii.   At least five pieces of mail from the

Virginia Employment Commission (VEC) addressed to three 5

different names: S.P., C.S., and R.S.

                 iii. At least 14 pieces of general mail addressed

to at least nine different names.

                 iv.   A check in the name of R.C. issued from the



     4 The lease associated with xx841 Arroyo Park Drive, Apt.
812, Valencia, CA 91355 is in the name of D.S.L and her
(D.S.L.’s) father. During an interview, McKENZIE admitted to
residing at the residence with D.S.L.
     5 Duplicative PUA claims were filed with both the EDD and
VEC using the same three identities of S.P., C.S., and R.S.
Claims with both EDD and VEC unemployment insurance claims used
the McKENZIE residence as their mailing address.
                                    13
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 15 of 46 Page ID #:15




County of Los Angeles.

                 v.    13 California EDD EBP debit cards in the

names of others:

                       (I)     Card ending in 6643 in the name of K.B.

                       (II) Card ending in 4290 in the name of I.T.

                       (III)        Card ending in 0419 in the name of

C.R.

                       (IV) Card ending in 0922 in the name of A.J.

                       (V)     Card ending in 5478 in the name of M.B.

                       (VI) Card ending in 4629 in the name of S.S.

                       (VII)        Card ending in 1113 in the name of

D.H.

                       (VIII)       Card ending in 2853 in the name of

B.A.

                       (IX) Card ending in 6369 in the name of D.G.

                       (X)     Card ending in 8846 in the name of W.S.

                       (XI) Card ending in 9843 in the name of C.S
                       (XII)        Card ending in 6329 in the name of
M.M.

                       (XIII)       Card ending in 6013 in the name of

R.S.

                 vi.   Three VEC debit cards in the names of

others:

                       (I)     Card ending in 4393 in the name of C.S.

                       (II) Card ending in 0708 in the name of R.S.

                       (III)        Card ending in 4937 in the name of

S.P.
                                     14
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 16 of 46 Page ID #:16




                 vii. One Chase Freedom credit card ending in 6780

in the name of T.M.

                 viii.           One Wells Fargo debit/credit card

ending in 9219 in the name of P.A.

                 ix.     Two cell phones

                 x.      Two computers

                 xi.     One iPad

                 xii. At least four Bank of America (BofA) ATM

withdrawal receipts identifying a total of $4,000 in cash

withdrawals from an ATM in Newhall, California, using the

following debit cards:

                         (I)     California EDD EBP debit card in the

name of K.B., ending in 6643;

                         (II) California EDD EBP debit card in the

name of W.S., ending in 8846;

                         (III)        California EDD EBP debit card in

the name of C.R., ending in 0419; and
                         (IV) California EDD EBP debit card in the
name of B.A., ending in 2853.

     D.    McKENZIE’s arrest and subsequent confession
           Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents, I

am aware of the following:

           a.    After McKENZIE was arrested, McKENZIE was

transported to the Crestena Valley Sheriff’s Station Jail where

he was read his Miranda rights and agreed to speak to LASD

Detectives D. Gaisford and L. Phillipi, who then conducted an
                                       15
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 17 of 46 Page ID #:17




audio-recorded interview of McKENZIE.

           b.    I reviewed that recording and the police report

of McKENZIE’s interview, from which I learned the following in

part:

                 i.      McKENZIE is originally from New York and was

currently unemployed.

                 ii.     McKENZIE and D.S.L. are the only occupants

who reside at unit 812, also known as xx841 Arroyo Park Drive,

Apt. 812, Valencia, CA (McKENZIE’s residence).

                 iii. McKENZIE’s cell phone ends in 7096.

                 iv.     McKENZIE acknowledged possessing at least 10

EDD debit cards in the names of others.

                 v.      McKENZIE claimed the EDD debit cards were

supposed to be picked up by the person who got him into “the

EDD.”

                 vi.     McKENZIE and D.S.L tried to help family

members apply for EDD.      After applying for D.S.L.’s family
members, McKENZIE and D.S.L failed to receive at least two EDD
debit cards associated with D.S.L.’s family members’ claims.

                 vii. McKENZIE believed the mailman might have

been responsible for the EDD debit cards not being delivered.

                 viii.        McKENZIE later observed an African

American mailman delivering mail at the community mail box

located at the apartment complex he and D.S.L. lived at in

Valencia, California.      During his observations, McKENZIE

allegedly witnessed the mailman stealing mail.

                 ix.     McKENZIE approached the mailman who he knew
                                    16
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 18 of 46 Page ID #:18




as “Erin” (known to law enforcement as GLOVER) and questioned

the mailman about various undelivered EDD mail to his apartment

(McKENZIE residence).       GLOVER reportedly admitted to McKENZIE

that he (GLOVER) was stealing EDD cards.

                  x.      GLOVER allegedly asked McKENZIE to work with

him in exchange for money.

                  xi.     McKENZIE reportedly agreed to accept mail

from EDD in the names of others at his residence (McKENZIE

residence). GLOVER offered McKENZIE between $250 and $500 per

EDD debit card delivered to him (McKENZIE).

                  xii. McKENZIE sometimes returned the EDD debit

cards to GLOVER after making cash withdrawals at BofA ATMs to

take his “cut.”    On a $1,000 withdrawal, McKENZIE would receive

$250 and GLOVER would receive $750.

                  xiii.        McKENZIE admitted to making more than

10, but less than 30, ATM cash withdrawals with EDD cards, and

he said he split the monies associated with those withdrawals
with GLOVER.
                  xiv. McKENZIE admitted to receiving “a lot” of

mail from EDD in the names of others while working with GLOVER.

                  xv.     McKENZIE was aware of some of the EDD debit

cards having $30,000 to $40,000 balances on them.

                  xvi. McKENZIE tried making cash withdrawals on

some of the EDD debit cards left at his residence by GLOVER but

the cards had been turned off.

                  xvii.        GLOVER was responsible for delivering

mail in the names of others to McKENZIE’s residence.
                                     17
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 19 of 46 Page ID #:19




                  xviii.       GLOVER was also responsible for

processing change of addresses with the bank that enabled EDD

debit cards to be routed for delivery to McKENZIE’s residence.

                  xix. The information needed to change the address

with the bank was the social security number and email

associated with the EDD account.

                  xx.     McKENZIE admitted to receiving personal and

business checks made payable to others that GLOVER had stolen

from the mail.

                  xxi. McKENZIE was supposed to find a way to cash

them.

                  xxii.        The delivery of EDD debit cards to

McKENZIE’s residence occurred primarily between May and

September 2020.

                  xxiii.       McKENZIE believed the EDD debit cards

were associated with real individuals because California used

Id.me. 6
                  xxiv.        McKENZIE acknowledged corresponding

with GLOVER via text message regarding the scheme.

                  xxv. On McKENZIE’s phone, GLOVER was saved as

“mailman.”

                  xxvi.        McKENZIE stopped communicating with

GLOVER after the Post Office changed his mail route.

                  xxvii.       McKENZIE admitted to being affiliated


       On or about October 5, 2020, EDD implemented ID.me to
        6
confirm the identity of applicants. As part of the identity
verification process, a facial recognition scan can be done
using a smart phone.
                                     18
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 20 of 46 Page ID #:20




with the Mac Baller Bloods gang in New York.

        E.   June 2021: Searches of GLOVER’s residence and his
             girlfriend’s separate residence

             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents who

have participated in this investigation, I am aware of the

following:

             a.   On or about June 15, 2021, the Honorable Suzette

Clover, Los Angeles County Superior Court, authorized and signed

a search warrant for a residence located on Catania Ct.,

Palmdale, CA 93552 (GLOVER Residence), GLOVER’s person, and

GLOVER’s girlfriend A.D.’s residence located on E. Nugent

Street, Lancaster, CA 93534 (A.D. residence.)

             b.   On or about June 17, 2021, the LASD executed the

search warrants at the GLOVER and A.D. residences.           During the

search of the GLOVER residence, GLOVER was encountered there.

Following the search, GLOVER was arrested by LASD.           I reviewed

police reports, evidence, and related items from LASD, from

which I know the following:

             c.   During the search of the GLOVER residence, the

following items were discovered:

                  i.   Three pieces of EDD mail with EDD EBP debit

cards in the names of others:

                       (I)     Card ending in 6752 in the name of S.M.

                       (II) Card ending in 7444 in the name of R.M.

                       (III)        Card ending in 9467 in the name of

K.Br.
                                     19
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 21 of 46 Page ID #:21




                  ii.   One cell phone

             d.   During the search of A.D.’s residence, the

following items were discovered:

                  i.    At least 25 pieces of mail from EDD

addressed to at least 15 different names primarily using mailing

addresses in Valencia and Santa Clarita, California, on GLOVER’s

USPS mail route, including McKENZIE’s residence.

                        (I)   The addressees on the mail included

I.T., L.M., K.A., D.G., D.B., K.B., S.P., and J.T, W.S., J.K.,

R.M., K.Br. and S.M.     Mail addressed to the some of those same

names was also located during the search of McKENZIE’s

residence.

                  ii.   11 personal and business checks made payable

to different names at addresses in the Valencia area, which

appear to be on or near GLOVER’s mail route.
             A total of more than 200 pieces of stolen mail were

found during the 2021 searches of McKENZIE and his girlfriend’s

residence, GLOVER’s residence, and GLOVER’s girlfriend’s

residence.

     F.      GLOVER’s confession

             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents

involved in the investigation, I am aware of the following:

             a.   During the execution of the search warrant at his

residence, GLOVER was detained and read his Miranda rights.            On

site, LASD Det. Gaisford, USPS-OIG SA S. Lanzl, and EDD CI I.

Romo conducted an audio-recorded interview of GLOVER.
                                    20
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 22 of 46 Page ID #:22




             b.   At the conclusion of the search, GLOVER was

arrested and transported to the Crescenta Valley Sheriff Station

where he was Mirandized and interviewed by LASD Detectives

Gaisford and Ventigan, which was recorded.

             c.   I reviewed the recordings and reports of both of

those interviews, from which I learned the following in part:

                  i.      GLOVER acknowledged being employed by the

USPS at the Valencia Post Office.

                  ii.     GLOVER’s cellular phone number ended in

7787.

                  iii. GLOVER told law enforcement they were at his

home because of a person he knew as guapo (subsequently

identified as McKENZIE).

                  iv.     GLOVER met McKENZIE on his mail route,

during which MCKENZIE introduced GLOVER to EDD fraud.

                  v.      McKENZIE routed EDD debit cards to addresses

on GLOVER’s mail route, and GLOVER would intercept the EDD debit
cards and provide them to McKENZIE.
                  vi.     McKENZIE was responsible for making the fake

EDD accounts and sending mail to addresses on GLOVER’s route.

                  vii. McKENZIE did not care if the addresses on

GLOVER’s route were vacant or occupied.

                  viii.        McKENZIE would drive around and ask

GLOVER if certain addresses were part of his mail route.

                  ix.     Initially, McKENZIE did not tell GLOVER he

was going to “put in” EDD applications and send mail to those

addresses.
                                     21
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 23 of 46 Page ID #:23




                 x.      Shortly after GLOVER met McKENZIE, a lot of

EDD mail started to be sent to addresses on GLOVER’s mail route

addressed to people who GLOVER knew did not live there.

                 xi.     GLOVER kept those pieces of mail, which he

knew was wrong, but he did so because McKENZIE expected GLOVER

to “grab em,” and GLOVER did not want anyone to know McKENZIE

was sending mail to those addresses.

                 xii. GLOVER stated “I got myself into with him

but he didn’t even f**king know the dude like that, like and was

just, he wouldn’t stop, he’d just keep sending shit, sending

shit…”

                 xiii.        McKENZIE gave GLOVER $1,000 in exchange

for two EDD debit cards that GLOVER had intercepted in the U.S.

Mail.

                 xiv. GLOVER kept a lot of the EDD mail in his

personal residence, as well as at his girlfriend A.D.’s home.

                 xv.     In addition to stealing the EDD debit cards
from the U.S. mail, GLOVER stole other EDD correspondence sent
in the mail.    He did so to avoid returning a lot of EDD mail to

the post office and raising suspicion.

                 xvi. In addition to intercepting EDD debit cards,

GLOVER stole mail containing checks with the intention of giving

the stolen checks to McKENZIE.

                 xvii.        GLOVER acknowledged knowing that

stealing mail was wrong.

                 xviii.       GLOVER admitted to using two of the EDD

debit cards that he had stolen from the U.S. Mail to make cash
                                    22
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 24 of 46 Page ID #:24




withdrawals at ATMs in Valencia, California.         He estimated that

he withdrew approximately $4,000 to $5,000 from ATMs.

                  xix. GLOVER activated the EDD debit cards he used

by calling EDD.    GLOVER received the PIN by knowing the last

four digits of the SSN associated with the EDD account.           GLOVER

received the last four digits of the SSN by intercepting other

EDD mail that contained the last four digits of the SSN.

                  xx.     GLOVER confirmed the mail he stole was on

mail route 46 in zip code 91355.

                  xxi. When shown a photograph of McKENZIE, GLOVER

positively identified McKENZIE as the person he knew as guapo.

                  xxii.        In addition to stealing EDD-related

mail, GLOVER admitted to stealing approximately 10-11 personal

and business checks from the U.S. mail.

                  xxiii.       GLOVER estimated the value of the

stolen checks to total approximately $22,000.

                  xxiv.        GLOVER specifically recalled discussing
the stolen checks via text message with McKENZIE.
                  xxv. GLOVER supplied McKENZIE with five or six

addresses on his (GLOVER’s) mail route, which McKENZIE could use

to send EDD mail.

                  xxvi.        GLOVER knew to steal all EDD mail and

provide it to McKENZIE.

                  xxvii.       GLOVER knew McKENZIE needed both the

EDD debit card and the letter from EDD containing the last four

digits of the SSN.

                  xxviii.      GLOVER stopped communicating with
                                     23
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 25 of 46 Page ID #:25




McKENZIE because he knew what he was doing was wrong and

McKENZIE was a scam artist.

                  xxix.      GLOVER felt bad about stealing mail,

but claimed he did it because he was “broke” and needed money.

     G.      Text messages between McKENZIE and GLOVER
             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents who

have participated in this investigation, I am aware of the

following:

             a.   DOL-OIG Assistant Special Agent in Charge (ASAC)

Marcus Valle reviewed Cellbrite 7 phone extraction reports of

digital devices seized on May 19, 2021, from McKENZIE and his

girlfriend’s residence, and digital devices seized on June 17,

2021, from GLOVER’s residence, which contained text messages

between MCKENZIE, using phone number ending in 7096, and GLOVER,

using phone number ending in 7787.        ASAC Valle provided me with

a sampling of text messages transcriptions between McKENZIE and

GLOVER during which both appear to be discussing their

fraudulent scheme.

             b.   Based upon my review of the following text

messages, it appears that GLOVER and McKENZIE were working

together to procure and/or use debit cards and/or mail in other

people’s names.

             c.   On or about December 20, 2020, McKENZIE and

GLOVER had the following conversation via text message:

     7 Cellbrite is software program primarily used to review
digital devices and highlight important data.
                                    24
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 26 of 46 Page ID #:26




                 i.      McKENZIE: “Somebody on ur route snatched 2

of my jawns wassup with that?”

                 ii.     McKENZIE: “LMK what time u heading to me bro

I need those been missing days on those”

                 iii. GLOVER: “Imma be headed out ther in 10 min

bro”

                 iv.     GLOVER: “I should be out there around 1230.”

                 v.      McKENZIE: “Alright bet”

                 vi.     McKENZIE: “Bring all 3 u have gang”

                 vii. GLOVER: “Bet”

                 viii.        MCKENZIE: “Eta gang”

                 ix.     MCKENZIE: “Lmk”

                 x.      GLOVER: “I’m be hopping off the fwy in 10

bro”

                 xi.     McKENZIE: “Alright Kopy”

                 xii. McKENZIE: “Lmk when u outside I’m gonna come

outside to u”
                 xiii.        GLOVER: “light Fasho”
                 xiv. McKENZIE: “Not trynna rush just missed mad

days and they starting to cut niggas cards off and shit”

                 xv.     GLOVER: “Nah you good bro I know them days

be running out quick that’s why I’m tryna get it to u”

           d.    Between on or about December 28, 2020, and on or

about December 29, 2020, MCKENZIE and GLOVER had the following

conversation via text message:

                 i.      McKENZIE: “Gonna send something along the

route gonna text u the name to grab it for me Brody”
                                    25
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 27 of 46 Page ID #:27




                 ii.   GLOVER: “Yo I got u might have to pull a

couple of strings cuz I’m out rn jus take care of me bro and I

got u fasho”

                 iii. McKENZIE: “light I got y for sure gang”

                 iv.   McKENZIE: “Send me a few addresses along ur

route gang”

                 v.    McKENZIE: “Addys vrody”

                 vi.   McKENZIE: “Brody need it rn lol”

            e.   On or about January 19, 2021, GLOVER and McKENZIE

had the following text message conversation:

                 i.    GLOVER: “xxx616 moreno dr 91355”

                                “xx706 via thomas dr 91355”

                                “xx055 bellis dr 91355”

                                “xx049 bellis dr 91355”

                                “xx025 arroyo park dr #15 91355”

                                “xx091 bellis dr 91355”

                 ii.   McKENZIE: “Gonna do 3 cards to each address
the most”
                 iii. McKENZIE: “Bet good looks gang the ones

without apartment numbers is houses?”

                 iv.   GLOVER: “All good just lmk when u send em so

I’ll be on the lookout”

                 v.    GLOVER: “Yea the ones with no numbers is

cribs”

                 vi.   McKENZIE: “And anything u see going to my

address grab it and lmk”

                 vii. GLOVER: “Gotchu”
                                    26
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 28 of 46 Page ID #:28




           f.    On or about January 20, 2021, McKENZIE and GLOVER

had the following text message conversation:

                 i.      McKENZIE: “Yoo”

                 ii.     GLOVER: “Yo”

                 iii. McKENZIE: “If u run into real cc and real

checks u know what to do I pay fir [sic] those too”

                 iv.     GLOVER: “Bet i kinda got a nigga I be juggin

wit but I’ll fucc with you if it’s good money”

                 v.      McKENZIE: “Facts bro always good bred with

me”

                 vi.     GLOVER: “Fasho imam keep you tapped in bro”

                 vii. McKENZIE: “Look out for 5 yards on ur route”

                 viii.        McKENZIE: “Any credit cards or debit

cards that come through too we could do sum with them”

           g.    On or about January 22, 2021, McKENZIE sent the

following text message to GLOVER:

                 i.      McKENZIE: “Yoo, if u cN [sic] find me
personal chase checks grab them shits we can be millionaire”
                 ii.     McKENZIE: “Yoo hit me”

           h.    On or about January 23, 2021, McKENZIE and GLOVER

had the following conversation via text message:

                 i.      McKENZIE: “Lmk which house/bank it’s from”

                 ii.     GLOVER: “They all different banks and shit

hella different address”

                 iii. McKENZIE: “Oh they all add up to 22k not

just one is 22k?”

                 iv.     GLOVER: “Yea”
                                    27
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 29 of 46 Page ID #:29




                 v.    GLOVER: “Couple big ones and some baby ones”

                 vi.   GLOVER: “Hit me when u can so we can chop I

ain’t tryna send no info thru text”

           i.    Between on or about January 28 and 31, 2021,

MCKENZIE and GLOVER had the following conversation via text

message:

                 i.    McKENZIE: “J[] K[] 8”
                 ii.   McKENZIE: “xx016 Monteno Dr

                 iii. McKENZIE: “Yoooo hit me”

                 iv.   McKENZIE: “Yooo please tell me u still on

that route gang like 10 cards landing today”

                 v.    GLOVER: “Yea I’m still on it we don’t do

mail on Sunday g tomorrow they should be there”

           j.    Between on or about February 11 and 12, 2021,

McKENZIE and GLOVER had the following conversation via text

message:

                 i.    McKENZIE: “J[] K[]”

                 ii.   McKENZIE: “xx016 Moreno Drive, Valencia, CA

91355”

                 iii. McKENZIE: “Yooo gang”

                 iv.   McKENZIE: “Hit me Brody”

                 v.    GLOVER: “Yowhats good I still aint see no

card come thru yet just the papers with the socials.still

waiting”


     8 J.K. is an identity that was used to file a PUA
application with EDD.


                                    28
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 30 of 46 Page ID #:30




                  vi.   McKENZIE: “Grab those for me too gang”

                  vii. GLOVER: “I know wassup”

     H.      Text messages between McKENZIE and D.S.L.
             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents who

have participated in this investigation, I am aware of the

following:

             a.   ASAC Valle reviewed Cellbrite phone extraction

reports of digital devices seized on May 20, 2021, from the

residence of MCKENZIE and his girlfriend D.S.L., which contained

text messages between MCKENZIE, using phone number ending in

7096, and D.S.L., using phone number ending in 7467.           ASAC Valle

informed me that between in or around August 2020 and in or

around April 2021, McKENZIE and D.S.L. appeared to discuss the

scheme and actions they took to execute the scheme.

             b.   According to ASAC Valle, McKENZIE and D.S.L.

engaged in text messages where they appeared to discuss

defrauding various state unemployment insurance programs,

including California and Virginia.        McKENZIE and D.S.L. used

text messages to send and receive directions necessary to

execute the scheme, such as:

                  i.    Sending PII of others to McKENZIE to use in

the filing of fraudulent UI applications.

                  ii.   Identifying physical addresses to be used in

order to route UI benefit cards to McKENZIE, which included

D.S.L.’s and McKENZIE’s residential address in Valencia,

California, as well as addresses of D.S.L.’s family and friends
                                    29
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 31 of 46 Page ID #:31




who resided in the Bakersfield, California, area.

                  iii. Creation of “fake” email accounts in the

names of others to be used when creating EDD profile accounts

during the application process.

                  iv.   Sending and receiving lists of EDD applicant

names, some of which were ID theft victims, so that D.S.L and/or

her family and friends could be on notice to receive mail in

those names.

                  v.    Directives to receive/retrieve EDD mail and

other correspondence.

                  vi.   Conducting EDD weekly certifications to

enable benefits to be issued.

                  vii. Solicitation of names, social security

numbers, driver’s license numbers, and dates of birth of

identities, which could be used by McKENZIE to file fraudulent

UI applications.

             c.   In addition to the above, McKENZIE and D.S.L.
appeared to acknowledge the criminal activity occurring on a
number of different occasions, which the following conversations

exemplify.
             According to ASAC Valle’s review of Cellbrite phone

extraction reports and text message transcriptions, McKENZIE and

D.S.L had the following conversations via text messages on or

about the following dates:

             a.   August 18, 2020: MCKENZIE sent D.S.L. a list of

10 names of EDD applicants whose EDD cards MCKENZIE was routing

to an address affiliated with D.S.L. in Bakersfield.
                                    30
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 32 of 46 Page ID #:32




           b.    September 8, 2020:      McKENZIE tells D.S.L. the
following with respect to her IP address…“?? I dint want them

having our IP address when I’m calling up the cards etc”

           c.    October 3, 2020:

                 i.    McKENZIE: “They just pulling over ppl

randomly in LA now to see if they have EDD cards on them”

                 ii.   D.S.L.: “sigh”

                 iii. D.S.L.: “you alright right”

                 iv.   D.S.L.: “you don’t have none right?”

           d.    October 24, 2020: McKENZIE tells D.S.L. the

following in part“... I’m about to come back to California and

do some more EDD cause I came out here to get a 18wheeler to

start my business and I did that now it’s time to work on my

money.”

           e.    November 9, 2020: McKENZIE and D.S.L. had the

following conversation via text message:

                       (I)   McKENZIE: “Trying to get ppl to sign up

for California Edd verify themselves then send me they login if

u know anyone that need my help getting it too Lmk love.”

                       (II) D.S.L.: “okay I will”

           f.    January 22, 2021: McKENZIE states the following

to D.S.L.: “60 apps is 1.8 mil”

           g.    March 3, 2021: McKENZIE tells D.S.L. that “I’m

gonna teach u how to do Virginia unemployment love and give u

some pros to use so u can make a lot of money too.”

           h.    May 19, 2021: McKENZIE informs D.S.L. of a

problem activating what is believed to be an EDD card, stating
                                    31
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 33 of 46 Page ID #:33




“…I did 2 other ppp’s that was been supposed to come but they

not here yet like shit still say pending this dumb ass nigga

still ain’t send the pic so can’t activate these cards and

fucking edd cut the cards I got off talking bout verify the

addresses and I need money to even get the fake proof of

addresses made Smfh it’s a lot I be having to deal with fr fr”

             i.   On multiple occasions, McKENZIE texted D.S.L.

that he is “doing apps” (believed to be referring to the

electronic filing of UI applications with EDD).

     I.      Research re: EDD Cards tied to McKENZIE and/or GLOVER
             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents who

have participated in this investigation, I am aware of the

following:

             a.   On July 23, 2021, BofA investigator J. Wilkinson

informed ASAC Valle that at least 23 EDD EBP debit cards

containing unemployment insurance benefits were mailed by BofA

to McKENZIE’s residence in Valencia, California.          Of those 23

EDD EBP debit cards, 22 were in the names of others, and one was

in the name of D.S.L.

             b.   In addition to the EDD EBP debit cards mailed to

McKENZIE’s residence, BofA identified a link between the above

referenced claims and two EDD EBP debit cards mailed to xx016

Moreno Drive, Valencia, CA (which the investigation identified

as an address provided to McKENZIE by GLOVER).

             c.   As of July 12, 2021, BofA reported that the above

25 EDD EBP debit cards had been loaded with a total benefit
                                    32
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 34 of 46 Page ID #:34




amount of $411,626.     At least $318,771 of that $411,626 had been

liquidated via ATM cash withdrawals, direct deposit funds

transfer to checking/savings, purchase of goods or services, and

teller cash withdrawals.

           d.    Between in or around February and March 2022, EDD

Criminal Investigator (CI) Ignacio Romo identified additional

claims associated with this fraudulent scheme, which brought the

suspected total loss of GLOVER and McKENZIE’s fraudulent scheme

to approximately $798,733, based upon approximately 52

fraudulent PUA claims.     Of those 52 claims, 44 claims listed the

McKENZIE residence as the mailing address, five claims listed

two other addresses in the Valencia/Santa Clarita area of Los

Angeles, three claims used two addresses in Bakersfield,

California, and one claim listed an address in Hayward,

California. 9
           e.    Four of the 13 EDD debit cards found during the

search of McKENZIE’s residence were used to make cash

withdrawals at a drive-thru ATM on or about December 18, 2020,

for the following amounts:

                 i.    CA EDD debit card in the name of K.B.,

ending in 6643 in the amount of $1,000.

                 ii.   CA EDD debit card in the name of C.R.,

ending in 0419 in the amount of $1,000.


     9 Both of the Bakersfield addresses were used in the
applications for EDD cards that were found during the search of
McKENZIE’s residence. Likewise, the Hayward address was used in
the applications for an EDD card that was found during the
search of McKENZIE’s residence.
                                    33
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 35 of 46 Page ID #:35




                 iii. CA EDD debit card in the name of B.A.,

ending in 2853 in the amount of $1,000.

                 iv.   CA EDD debit card in the name of W.S.,

ending in 8846 in the amount of $1,000.

           f.    ASAC Valle obtained ATM surveillance photos from

BofA, which revealed that on or about December 18, 2020, a male

fitting the physical description of McKENZIE made cash

withdrawals from a BofA drive-thru ATM between 9:06 p.m. and

9:10 p.m. using a silver four door sedan. 10
     J.    Victim K.B.

           As noted above, one of the EDD EBP debit cards that

McKENZIE used to make a cash withdrawal of at least $1,000,

which was also found in McKENZIE’s residence when it was

searched, was in the name of K.B.

           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:

           a.    On or about November 24, 2020, a PUA claim in the

name of K.B. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant K.B. was

unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

           b.    The PUA application contained K.B.’s name, date

of birth (DOB), Social Security Number (SSN), and alleged that

K.B. was employed as an assembler/production.          The claim

identified a last employer as Paramount Pictures.

     10Based upon observations during the 2021 searches,
McKENZIE’s girlfriend D.S.L drives a vehicle matching the
physical description of the vehicle depicted on those ATM
surveillance photographs.
                                    34
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 36 of 46 Page ID #:36




           c.    The claim listed McKENZIE’s residential address

as K.B.’s reported mailing address.

           d.    The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EBP

debit card ending in 6643 in the name of K.B. to be generated

and sent by U.S. Mail to K.B. at the listed mailing address,

which was McKENZIE’s residence.
           On or about April 21, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

K.B. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed in

K.B.’s name.    Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that K.B.

told ASAC Valle the following:

           a.    K.B. has never resided or worked in, nor visited,

California.

           b.    K.B. confirmed that the DOB and SSN provided on

the PUA claim in her name belonged to her.

           c.    K.B. had never been employed as an

assembler/production.

           d.    K.B. never lived in Valencia, California.

           e.    K.B. never filed a PUA claim with California EDD

and did not authorize anyone to file a claim in his or her name.

     K.    Victim W.S.

           As noted above, one of the EDD EBP debit cards that

McKENZIE used to make a cash withdrawal of at least $1,000,

which was also found in McKENZIE’s residence when it was

searched, was in the name of W.S.

           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:
                                    35
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 37 of 46 Page ID #:37




           a.    On or about November 19, 2020, a PUA claim in the

name of W.S. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant W.S. was

unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

           b.    The PUA application contained W.S.’s name, DOB,

SSN, and alleged that W.S. was employed as an

assembler/production.     The claim identified a last employer as

Paramount Pictures.

           c.    The claim listed McKENZIE’s residential address

as W.S.’s reported mailing address

           d.    The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EBP

debit card ending in 8846 in the name of W.S. to be generated

and sent by U.S. Mail to W.S. at the listed mailing address,

which was McKENZIE’s residence.
           On or about April 21, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

W.S. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed in

W.S.’s name.    Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that W.S.

told ASAC Valle the following:

           a.    W.S. has never resided in, worked in, or visited

the State of California.

           b.    W.S. had never been employed as an

assembler/production.

           c.    W.S. never lived in Valencia, California.

           d.    W.S. never filed a PUA claim with EDD.

     L.    Victim M.M.

           As noted above, one of the EDD EBP debit cards that

was found in McKENZIE’s residence when it was searched was in

the name of M.M.
                                    36
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 38 of 46 Page ID #:38




           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:

           a.    On or about February 4, 2021, a PUA claim in the

name of M.M. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant M.M. was

unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

           b.    The PUA application contained M.M.’s name, DOB,

SSN, and alleged that M.M. was employed as an

assembler/production line.      The claim identified a last employer

as Paramount Pictures.

           c.    The claim listed McKENZIE’s residential address

as M.M.’s reported mailing address.

           d.    The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EDD EBP

debit card ending in 6329 in the name of M.M. to be generated

and sent by U.S. Mail to M.M. at the listed mailing address,

which was McKENZIE’s residence.

           On or about February 7, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

M.M. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed in

M.M.’s name.    Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that M.M.

told ASAC Valle the following:

           a.    M.M. has never resided in, worked in, or visited

the State of California.

           b.    M.M. was never employed as an assembler.

           c.    M.M. never lived in Valencia, California, and was

not familiar with the address xx841 Arroyo Park Drive, Apt. 812,

Valencia, California 91355 (McKENZIE’s residence).

           d.    M.M. did not have any friends or associates who
                                    37
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 39 of 46 Page ID #:39




reside in California.

           e.     M.M. never filed a PUA claim with EDD and did not

authorize anyone to file a claim in his or her name.

           f.     M.M. did not know McKENZIE.

     M.    Victim C.S.
           As noted above, one of the EDD EBP debit cards that

was found in McKENZIE’s residence when it was searched was in

the name of C.S.

           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:

           a.     On or about November 11, 2020, a PUA claim in the

name of C.S. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant C.S. was

unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

           b.     The PUA application contained C.S.’s name, DOB,

SSN, and alleged that C.S. was employed as an

assembler/production.     The claim identified a last employer as

Paramount Pictures.

           c.     The claim listed McKENZIE’s residential address

as C.S.’s mailing address.

           d.     The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EDD EBP

debit card ending in 9843 in the name of C.S. to be generated

and sent by U.S. Mail to C.S. at the listed mailing address,

which was McKENZIE’s residence.

           On or about February 7, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

C.S. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed in

C.S’s name.     Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that C.S. told
                                    38
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 40 of 46 Page ID #:40




ASAC Valle the following:

           a.    C.S. has never resided or worked in, nor visited,

California.

           b.    C.S. was never employed by Paramount Pictures.

           c.    During the pandemic, C.S. was employed by Dave

and Busters.

           d.    C.S.’s employment was negatively impacted by

COVID-19, resulting in C.S. receiving UI benefits in New York.

           e.    C.S. was not familiar with the address xx841

Arroyo Park Drive, Apt. 812, Valencia, California (McKENZIE’s

residence).

           f.    C.S. never filed a PUA claim with EDD and did not

authorize anyone to file a claim in his or her name.

     N.    Victim M.S.
           As noted above, EDD mail in the name of M.S. was found

in McKENZIE’s residence when it was searched.

           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:

           a.    On or about August 16, 2020, a PUA claim in the

name of M.S. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant M.S. was

unemployed because of the COVID 19 pandemic.

           b.    The PUA application contained M.S.’s name, DOB,

SSN, and identified M.S. as self-employed.

           c.    The claim listed McKENZIE’s residential address

as M.S.’s mailing address.

           d.    The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EDD EBP
                                    39
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 41 of 46 Page ID #:41




debit card ending in 0146 in the name of M.S. to be generated

and sent to by U.S. Mail to M.S. at the listed mailing address,

which was McKENZIE’s residence.
           On or about February 7, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

M.S. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed in

M.S’s name.     Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that M.S. told

ASAC Valle the following:

           a.     M.S. has never resided or worked in the State of

California.

           b.     M.S. was never self-employed or worked as a bank

teller.

           c.     M.S. was not familiar with the address xx841

Arroyo Park Drive, Apt. 812, Valencia, California (McKENZIE’s

residence).

           d.     M.S. never filed a PUA claim with EDD and did not

authorize anyone to file a claim in his or her name.

     O.    Victim R.M.

              As noted above, one of the EDD EBP debit cards that

was found in GLOVER’s residence when it was searched was in the

name of R.M.

           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:

           a.     On or about August 20, 2020, a PUA claim in the

name of R.M. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant R.M. was

unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

           b.     The PUA application contained R.M.’s name, DOB,
                                    40
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 42 of 46 Page ID #:42




SSN, and identified R.M.’s occupation as a cook.

           c.     The claim listed a residential address in

Lancaster, California.

           d.     After the application was filed, the address was

changed to xx015 Cooper Hill Drive, #4302, Valencia,

California. 11
           e.     The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EDD EBP

debit card ending in 7444 in the name of R.M. to be generated

and sent using the U.S. Mail in the name of R.M to the Valencia

address, which was on GLOVER’s mail route.

           On or about February 23, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

R.M. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed in

R.M.’s name.     Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that R.M.

told ASAC Valle the following:

           a.     R.M. resides in Little Rock, Arkansas.

           b.     R.M. has never resided or worked in the State of

California.

           c.     R.M. was never employed as a cook.

           d.     In or about April or May 2020, R.M.’s employer

informed R.M. that R.M.’s identity had been stolen.

           e.     R.M. was not familiar with the Valencia address

to which the EDD EBP debit card in his/her name had been mailed.

(As noted above, that was an address on GLOVER’s USPS mail

route.)

     11xx015 Cooper Hill Drive, #4302, Valencia, California was
an address on GLOVER’s USPS mail route. Review of text messages
between GLOVER and McKENZIE revealed the address was supplied to
McKENZIE as an address that could be used.
                                    41
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 43 of 46 Page ID #:43




           f.    R.M. never filed a PUA claim with EDD and did not

authorize anyone to file a claim in his or her name.

           g.    R.M. did not authorize anyone to possess mail in

R.M.’s name at any addresses including the above referenced

Valencia address.

     P.    Victim K.Br.
           As noted above, an EDD EBP debit card in the name of

K.Br. was found in GLOVER’s residence when it was searched.

           Based on my review of records provided to me by EDD

and conversations with other agents and investigators who have

participated in this investigation, I know the following:

           a.    On or about August 24, 2020, a PUA claim in the

name of K.Br. was filed with EDD, stating that claimant K.Br.

was unemployed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

           b.    The PUA application contained K.Br.’s name, DOB,

SSN, and identified K.Br.’s occupation as a cook.

           c.    The claim listed a residential address in

Hesperia, California.

           d.    After the application was filed, the address was

changed to an address in Valencia on GLOVER’s mail route.

           e.    The filing of the PUA claim triggered an EDD EBP

debit card ending in 9467 in the name of K.Br. to be generated

and sent by U.S. Mail to K.Br. at the Valencia address, which

was on GLOVER’s mail route.

           On or about February 23, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

K.Br. by telephone regarding the PUA claim that had been filed

in K.Br.’s name.    Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that
                                    42
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 44 of 46 Page ID #:44




K.Br. told ASAC Valle the following:

           a.     K.Br. resides in Texas.

           b.     K.Br. has never resided or worked in the State of

California.

           c.     K.Br. was not familiar with the Valencia address

to which the EDD EBP debit card in K.Br.’s name had been mailed.

           d.     K.Br. never filed a PUA claim with EDD, and did

not authorize anyone to file a claim in his or her name.

           e.     K.Br. did not authorize anyone to possess mail

addressed to K.Br. at any addresses, including the above

referenced Valencia address.

     Q.    Other stolen mail
           As noted above, different pieces of EDD-related mail

addressed to the same person, S.M., including an EDD EBP debit

card ending in 6752, were found at separate locations - at

GLOVER’s residence and the residence of his girlfriend A.D. 12

           On or about February 23, 2022, ASAC Valle interviewed

S.M. by telephone regarding the EDD mail addressed to S.M. that

was seized during the searches of the GLOVER and A.D.

residences.     Based on ASAC Valle’s report, I know that S.M. told

ASAC Valle the following:

           a.     S.M. currently resides in Castaic, California,

but previously resided at xx853 Arroyo Park Drive, Apt. 309,

Valencia, California 91355 (an address on GLOVER’s mail route).


     12During his interview with law enforcement, GLOVER
admitted to stealing and storing mail matter at his girlfriend
A.D.’s home.
                                    43
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 45 of 46 Page ID #:45




             b.   S.M. had not received EDD benefits since 2017,

and was unaware of how an EDD EBP debit card would have been

issued in his/her name and sent to his/her previous address.

             c.   S.M. was not impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

             d.   S.M. did not authorize anyone to possess mail, to

include correspondence from EDD and/or an EDD EBP debit card

addressed to S.M.’s previous address on Arroyo Park Drive in

Valencia, CA 91355.

     R.      GLOVER’s termination from USPS employment
             Based on my review of investigative reports and my

conversations with other law enforcement officers and agents who

have participated in this investigation, I am aware of the

following:

             a.   On or about June 17, 2021, the USPS suspended

GLOVER without pay from his position as a mail carrier for

potential loss of mail or funds.

             b.   On or about August 18, 2021, USPS informed GLOVER

in writing of a Notice of Removal (NOR) from his position of

mail carrier.     The NOR informed GLOVER that the USPS intended to

terminate GLOVER within 30 days from the date of receipt of the

letter (August 25, 2021). The reason for the NOR was “failure to

follow instructions/unacceptable conduct-mail theft.”

Specifically, the NOR referenced the following reasons for the

actions taken by the USPS in part:

                  i.    Possession of EDD mail and other mail matter

by GLOVER at his residence and vehicle.

                  ii.   Admission to law enforcement that GLOVER had
                                    44
 Case 2:22-cr-00268-SB Document 1 Filed 05/13/22 Page 46 of 46 Page ID #:46




stolen mail on route 046 in zip code 91355.

                              V. CONCLUSION
           Based on the information set forth above, there is

probable cause to believe that Stephen GLOVER and Travis

McKENZIE violated Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341

(Mail Fraud).

           Therefore, I respectfully request that the Court issue

the complaint and two arrest warrants.


Attested to by the applicant in
accordance with the requirements
of Fed. R. Crim. P. 4.1 by
telephone on this 13th
                  ____ day of May
2022.



 DOUGLAS F. McCORMICK
HONORABLE DOUGLAS F. McCORMICK
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE




                                    45


File and source

File
gov.uscourts.cacd.855527.1.0.pdf
Size
387,898 bytes
SHA-256
123916a9b2cd124badf8ec7fd165fc7926fd5317330d8191ec7b6f77f92e5016
Our copy
gov.uscourts.cacd.855527.1.0.pdf
Original
www.courtlistener.com
Back to top