Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 25-CR-60273-HUCK
UNITED STATES OF AM ERICA
VS.
PATRICK MARQUIS AYTON JR,
Defendant.
/
FACTUAL PROFFER
The United States of America and PATRICK M ARQUIS AYTON JR (hereinafter,
ttDefendanf') hereby stipulate and agree that, were this case to proceed to trial, the United States
would prove beyond a reasonable doubt the following facts, am ong others, which occurred in
Broward County, in the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, at a1l times material to the
lndictment:
Backeround
1.
Bank of America, N.A. ti%ank of America'') was a financial institution whose
accounts were insured by the Federal Deposit lnsurance Corporation (%TDlC'').
Unemployment lnsurance (tEUl'') was ajoint state and federal program that provided
monetary benefits to eligible beneficiaries. UI benefits were intended to provide temporary financial
assistance to lawful workers who were unemployed through no fault of their own.
Beginning in or around M arch 2020, in response to the COVID-I 9 pandemic, the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act of 2020 created several federal
programs, including the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program, Federal Pandem ic
Unemployment Compensation, and the Lost W ages Assistance Program, which expanded UI
1
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 1 of 7
eligibility and increased UI benefits to individuals who were unemployed because of the COVID-19
pandemic (t'pandemic U1 Benefits').
4.
The California Employment Development Department (<tCA-EDD'') was an agency
of the State of Californiathat administered Ul benefits for residents of California, including Pandemic
Ul Benetits. Persons applying for Ul benefits in California, including Pandemic Ul Benefits, were
required to reside in the State of California and submit to CA-EDD an application for the benefits.
Applications for Pandemic U1 Benefits were submitted online.
A claimant for Pandemic Ul Benefits was required to answer various questions on the
claimant's application to esublish the claimant's eligibility for the benefits. Among other things, the
claimant was required to provide personally identifiable information (ttP11''), including the claimant's
name, date of birth, and social security number, and certify to CA-EDD under penalty of perjury that
the COVID-19 pandemic had directly and adversely affected the claimant's employment. Claimants
applying for Pandemic Ul Benefits did not need to submit any supporting documents to CA-EDD
with their applications. lndividuals who were employed, retired, or incarcerated were not eligible for
Ul benests, including Pandemic Ul Benefits. The CA-EDD relied upon the information in the
application to determine the claimant's eligibility for benefits.
Additionally, to successfully file a claim for Pandemic UI Benefits with CA-EDD, the
claimant had to pass an identity veritication provided by ID.me, lnc. (E:ID.me'')s a third-party online
identity verification service. The lD.me. identity veritk ation process required the claimant to provide
the claimant's PIl, a government-issued form of identification, and a selfie photograph taken in real-
time. During the ID.me identity veritkation process, a text m essage was sent to the phone number
provided by the applicant that contained a link that allowed the claimant to provide the required
photograph of the claimant's government-issued form of identification and take a real-time selfie
2
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 2 of 7
photograph. lD.me's facial recognition software was then used to compare the applicant's real-time
seltie photograph with the photograph on the claimant's government-issued form of identifk ation.
lf CA-EDD approved an application and granted Pandem ic Ul Benefits to the
claimant, Bank of America created a prepaid debit account in the claimant's name (EIBOA Debit
Accounf') into which CA-EDD deposited the claimant's Pandemic UI Benefits. The Pandemic Ul
Benefits deposited in the BOA Debit Account were moneys and funds tmder the custody and control
of Bank of America.
8.
To access the Pandem ic Ul Benefits that were deposited in the BOA Debit Account,
Bank of America issued a debit card (tBOA Debit Card'') in the name of the claimant that was linked
to the claimant's BOA Debit Account containing the money and funds from the Pandemic U1
Benefits. Bank of America mailed the BOA Debit Card to an address provided by the claimant and
could be activated by telephone or online. Once activated, the BOA Debit Card could be used to
withdraw Pandemic Ul Benefks from the BOA Debit Account in the form of cash dispensed from
automated teller machines (%%ATM s''), including ATM S that Barlk of America operated. The BOA
Debit Cards could also be used to make purchases by debiting the claimant's Pandemic Ul Benefits
from the BOA Debit Account in point-of-sale transactions.
Visa Debt Processing Solutions (dtvisa DPS'') was a vendor contracted by Bank of
America to process all transactions on UI prepaid debit cards, including those issued by the CA-EDD.
Visa DPS had two platform processor data centers that housed all of the Ul prepaid card data for Bank
of America. Those data centers were located in Ashbum , Virginia and Highlands Ranch, Colorado.
Any transaction made on a Bank of America Ul prepaid debit card, including loading of funds, point-
of-sale transactions, and ATM withdrawals, passed through one of those two dat.a processor centers.
3
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 3 of 7
The Conspiracv
l0.
From in and around September 2020, and continuing through in or around M ay
2022, Defendant agreed with co-defendants Lindsley Chambers Jr., Robert M cKinley Thom as,
Justin Anthony Seivright, Tacaveon Travon Carson, Phillip M ichael Valcin Jr., Brandon Jerome
Snider, and others, to accomplish a common and unlawful plan to comm it bank fraud and wire
fraud. The purpose of the unlawful plan was for Defendant and his co-conspirators to enrich
themselves by fraudulently obtaining Ul benefits, including Pandem ic Ul Benefits, from CA-EDD
that were under the custody and control of financial institutions, including Bank of America.
Defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the plan and willfully joined in it.
l 1 .
Defendant and his co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy in multiple steps,
including, but not limited to, the following:
a.
One or more co-conspirators obtained without lawful authority Pll of
victims of identity theft Ctldentity Theft Victims''), including names, dates
of birth, and social security numbers.
One or more co-conspirators created counterfeit driver licenses and other
fictitious forms of identification (collectively, <tcounterfeit IDs'') by
combining unlawfully obtained PII of
b.
ldentity Theft Victims and
photographs of co-conspirators, including co-defendants Chambers and
Thomas.
One or more co-conspirators submitted and caused the submission of false
and fraudulent applications to CA-EDD for Pandemic UI Benefits using the
unlawfully obtained PIl and Counterfeit 1Ds. These applications were
C.
4
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 4 of 7
submitted online and caused information to be transmitted by wire in
interstate commerce.
W hen prompted to verify the identity of the purported applicant through
lD.me, Chambers and one or more co-conspirators submitted for
comparison a real-time selfie photograph of Chambers' face and a
photograph of a Counterfeit ID bearing a picture of Chambers's face and
PIl of the purported applicant (i.e., an Identity Theft Victim).
d.
e.
Defendant and his co-conspirators possessed and used BOA Debit Cards
issued in the names of ldentity Theft Victim s to fraudulently access and
receive Pandemic U1 Benefits, in the form of m oney and funds under the
custody and control of Bank of America, by making cash withdrawals at
ATM S and debit purchase.
12.
ln total during the conspiracy, the co-conspirators submitted and caused the
submission of false and fraudulent applications to CA-EDD for Pandemic Ul Benetsts on behalf
of at least 146 unique ldentity Theft Victim s. As a result of these false and fraudulent applications,
the co-conspirators caused CA-EDD to pay Pandemic Ul Benefits in the approximate amount of
$2,095,831, which CA-EDD disbursed to BOA Debit Accounts under the custody and control of
Bank of America. Of this amount, Defendant and his co-conspirators unlawfully withdrew in cash,
and othem ise unlawfully received, approximately $1 ,670,954 of fraudulent Pandemic Ul Benefits.
Defendant's Role in the C onspiracv
13.
Defendant's role in the conspiracy included, among other things, making cash
withdrawals of fraudulently obtained Pandemic U1 Benefits at Bank of America ATM S in Broward
County using BOA Debit Cards issued in the names of Identity Theft Victims. ATM surveillance
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 5 of 7
photographs show that, from approximately M ay 26, 2021 to July 14, 2021, Defendant made at
least 57 withdrawals of fraudulently obtained Pandemic UI Benefits at Bank of America ATM S in
Broward County using BOA Debit Cards issued to 18 unique ldentity Theft Victim s. At least one
of the BOA Debit Cards that Defendant used was also used by a co-defendant to make withdrawals
of fraudulent Pandemic Ul Benetits.
ln particular, on July 4, 2021, at approximately 10:27 a.m., during and in relation
to a felony violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1344 (bank fraud), Defendant
knowingly possessed and used without lawful authority the means of identification of another
person. That is, Defendant possessed and used the BOA Visa Debit Card ending number 2007 of
R.A., an Identity Theft Victim, to withdraw $1,000 of fraudulently obtained Pandem ic UI Benefits
from a Bank of America ATM located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. R.A . did not file any
application for any U1 benefks with CA-EDD, did not give anyone permission to tile for Ul
benefits with CA-EDD, did not provide or authorize his Pll to be possessed or used by Defendant
for any pum ose, and did not know Defendant or anyone else used R.A.'S identity to file for UI
benefits and withdraw fraudulent Ul benefits.
l5.
As a result of Defendant's own conduct in the conspiracy, and the conduct of his
co-conspirators reasonably foreseeable to him , Defendant is responsible for causing an intended
loss greater than $1,500,000 and less than $3,500,000.
fRemainder ofpage Intentionally Blankj
6
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 6 of 7
The United States and Defendant agree that these facts, which do not include all
facts known to the United States and Defendant, are sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt
the elements of conspiracy to comm it bank fraud and wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United
States Code, Section 1349, as charged in Count 1, and aggravated identity theft, in violation of
Title 1 8, United States Code, Section l 028A, as charged in Count 36, and that Defendant is in fact
guilty of those offenses.
q P,J sy,
/
Ilate:
l
Date :
JASON A. REDING QUX ONES
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
/
DAVID A .
IDER
ASSISTANT
TED STATES ATTORNEY
M lC AE A. S INTON
ATTORN
O DEFENDANT
*.
PATRICK M ARQUIS A TON JR
D EFEN DAN T
J-/9-1/
flate:
Case 0:25-cr-60273-PCH Document 168 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2026 Page 7 of 7