Defendant Tamara Dadyan's Sentencing Memorandum (Document 1174)

Summary

Defendant's Sentencing Memorandum filed November 30, 2021 as Document 1174 for Tamara Dadyan in No. 2:20-CR-00579-SVW-4, dated November 29, 2021, for sentencing then scheduled for December 6, 2021. It asks for a sentence of 24 months incarceration as sufficient but not greater than necessary. It notes her pending motion to withdraw her plea, says her brother-in-law Richard Ayvazyan was the mastermind who received the vast majority of the funds, and says she applied for loans for her own company and helped her husband and cousin with theirs. It disputes the Guideline range in the presentence report, compares her to co-defendants' sentences, and says she is prepared to make restitution.

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

Cite this document

“Defendant Tamara Dadyan's Sentencing Memorandum (Document 1174).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-c-d-cal-no-2-20-cr-00579-dkt-1174-c-d-cal-ed152f4607/, SHA-256 5a8b3b18cbccee66ab5d13a88b5206d5784e08216ce2debb98aa47df102ed50d.

Full text

Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:18878

1 JERRY KAPLAN, ESQ. Bar No. 49142
JOSEPH BENINCASA, ESQ. Bar. No. 251347
2
Kaplan, Kenegos and Kadin
3 Attorneys at Law
9150 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 175
4 Beverly Hills, California 90212
Email: kapkenkd@pacbell.net
5
Telephone:(310) 859-7700
6 Facsimile:(310) 859-7773
Attorneys for Defendant
7 TAMARA DADYAN
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9

10 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CASE NO. 2:20-CR-00579-SVW-4
13
Plaintiff, DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING
14 MEMORANDUM
15 vs.

16 TAMARA DADYAN,
17
Defendant.
18

20 Defendant Tamara Dadyan submits this Sentencing Memorandum for consideration at
21
her Sentencing, currently scheduled for December 6, 2021. For the reasons stated below, a
22
sentence of 24 months incarceration will be sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to satisfy
23

24 the goals of sentencing as determined by Congress.

25 Date: November 29, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
26 /s/ Jerry Kaplan
27 JERRY KAPLAN
Attorneys for Defendant
28 TAMARA DADYAN

1
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 2 of 12 Page ID #:18879

1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
2
I.
3
INTRODUCTION
4
The defendant pleaded guilty on June 14, 2021. Shortly thereafter, the defendant filed a
5

6 Motion to Withdraw her plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel, to wit, that her prior

7 counsel, Fred Minassian, misadvised her to admit to a factual basis that contained false
8
statements. The Motion is under submission and defendant will not seek to re-litigate it here;
9
however, defendant notes that the crux of her argument was that due to her counsel's errors and
10
poor advice, the defendant admitted to a loss amount that exposed her to a significantly higher
11

12 sentence than she would have faced had she pleaded open to the counts of which she was

13 actually guilty and proceeded to trial on the remaining counts. Her counsel told her she had to
14
accept the agreement or lose at trial and receive “20 plus years.” To the shock of no one, and
15
despite the promises of Mr. Minassian regarding her plea, the government is seeking 21 years
16
and 7 months imprisonment.
17

18 The defendant's brother-in-law, co-defendant Richard Ayvazyan, was the mastermind of

19 this scheme and received the vast majority of the funds from the conspiracy. Richard's brother,
20
co-defendant Artur Ayvazyan, is the defendant's husband. Richard Ayvazyan used the defendant
21
and her husband's home to store materials used in his scheme – notary stamps, bank information,
22
and stolen or forged identities. Richard also showed the defendant how to apply for loans for her
23

24 own company and that of her husband's. Ms. Dadyan owed Richard Ayvazyan for a personal

25 loan he made to her and her husband, and Richard advised her that she could apply for a loan for
26
her business and pay him back. Ms. Dadyan then applied for fraudulent loans for her own
27
company, and assisted her husband and her cousin, Vahe Dadyan, in making their own
28

2
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 3 of 12 Page ID #:18880

1 applications. The defendant did not receive monies beyond the money from her own loans. The
2
defendant used her own name and her company's name to apply for the loans. While it is true
3
that she transferred some of her loan proceeds to an escrow account belonging to Richard
4
Ayvazyan, this was money that she and her husband owed Richard for a prior unrelated family
5

6 loan that he requested she pay into escrow. Ms. Dadyan denies that she assisted or participated

7 in the application, processing, or laundering of any other monies involved in the conspiracy and
8
had no involvement in any other part of the scheme.
9
This defendant respectfully disagrees with the Guideline range proposed by the
10
Presentence Investigation Report, and asserts that her proper Guideline offense level should be
11

12 21, calculated as follows:

13 Base Offense Level: 7 USSG §2B1.1(b)(1)
14
Loss Amount ($732,838) 14 USSG §2B1.1(b)(1)(H)
15
Money Laundering 2 USSG §2S1.1(b)(2)(B)
16
Mitigating Role -2 USSG §3B1.2
17

18 Acceptance of Responsibility -2 USSG §3E1.1(a)

19 Total Offense Level: 19
20
Defendant's Criminal History Category is properly calculated as level I. Defendant's
21
guideline range is therefore 30-37 months. Defendant was also convicted of a violation of
22
18U.S.C. §1028A, resulting in an additional two years of imprisonment, to be applied
23

24 consecutively.

25 Total Guideline Range: 54-61 months imprisonment.
26

3
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 4 of 12 Page ID #:18881

1 Based on the defendant's relevant conduct and the sentences received by her co-
2
defendants, a sentence of 24 months imprisonment will be sufficient, but not greater than
3
necessary, to achieve the aims of sentencing.
4

6 II.

7 LOSS CALCULATION
8
The defendant was wrongfully advised to admit to a loss calculation of $21.7 Million. As
9
noted in the defendant's texts and emails to her counsel, as well as her plea colloquy to the Court,
10
the defendant was only involved in four loans totaling $732,838.1 The defendant noted multiple
11

12 times in confidential conversations with Mr. Minassian (since waived) that she was doing

13 Richard a favor by letting him store the materials in her home and that he, his wife, co-defendant
14
Marietta Terabelian, and co-defendant Manuk Grigoryan, were the primary actors in the
15
conspiracy.
16
Pinkerton liability does not translate directly into sentencing culpability. U.S. v. Collazo,
17

18 984 V.3d 1308, 0334 (9th Cir. 2021).2 The guidelines acknowledge that they do not establish

19 standards of criminal liability as stated in application notes to §1B1.3:
20

22
1
Or $661,838, based on the admissions of the factual basis. Both amounts result in the same loss
23 calculation.
2
See Also: United States v. McClatchey, 316 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (10th Cir. 2003) (conviction of
24 conspiracy does not make defendant responsible under § 1B1.3 for all reasonably foreseeable bribes paid by his
coconspirators; the bribes must also fall within the scope of the defendant's joint undertaking); United States v. Soto-
25 Piedra, 525 F.3d 527, 531-33 (7th Cir.) (“Conspiracy liability . . . is generally much broader than jointly undertaken
criminal activity under section 1B1.3. . . . Actions of coconspirators that a particular defendant does not assist or
26 agree to promote are generally not within the scope of that defendant’s jointly undertaken activity.”), cert. denied,
129 S. Ct. 261, 172 L. Ed. 2d 195 (2008); United States v. Swiney, 203 F.3d 397, 404 (6th Cir. 2000) ("[T]he
27 Sentencing Guidelines have modified the Pinkerton theory of liability so as to harmonize it with the Guidelines’ goal
of sentencing a defendant according to the ‘seriousness of the actual conduct of the defendant and his
28 accomplices.’”) (quoting Wilkins & Steer, supra) (distinguished in United States v. McIntosh, 236 F.3d 968, 974
(8th Cir. 2001)); United States v. Lanni, 970 F.2d 1092, 1093 (2d Cir. 1992) ("[A]n important distinction exists

4
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 5 of 12 Page ID #:18882

1 Sentencing Accountability and Criminal Liability.—The principles and limits of
2
sentencing accountability under this guideline are not always the same as the
principles and limits of criminal liability. . . . [T]he focus [of the Guidelines] is on
3 the specific acts and omissions for which the defendant is to be held accountable
4 in determining the applicable guideline range, rather than on whether the
defendant is criminally liable for an offense as a principal, accomplice, or
5
conspirator.
6
U.S.S.G. §1B1.3, comment. (n.1)
7

8 The defendant applied for two loans for her company and helped her husband apply for

9 one for his company. The defendant also assisted her cousin, Vahe Dadyan, translate his
10 application so he could apply for a loan. She had no other involvement in the applying,
11
processing, or laundering any other loans. Although she texted with Richard Ayvazyan at times,
12
she did not take part in or assist in any of his loans, or those of any other defendant besides her
13

14 husband and cousin. The proper loss adjustment is therefore +14 levels for the four loans in

15 which defendant was involved USSG §2B1.1(b)(1)(H).
16

17
III.
18
VICTIM ADJUSTMENT
19

20 The defendant objects to a +2 adjustment pursuant to USSG §2B1.1(b)(2). The

21 defendant's relevant conduct involved four total loans through four banks. Therefore, there are
22 insufficient victims to support an adjustment for more than 10 victims. The entire conspiracy
23
involved 12 banks; however, the defendant was wrongly advised to enter a plea that admitted she
24

28 between the criminal law standard for convicting a defendant of conspiracy and the Guidelines standard for
sentencing a defendant convicted of conspiracy.”

5
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 6 of 12 Page ID #:18883

1 was culpable for all $21.7 Million for every loan from 12 different banks. She is not, and should
2
never have been advised to enter into a plea making such an admission.
3

4
IV.
5

6 SOPHISTICATED MEANS

7 The Presentence Report correctly notes that Application note 9 to USSG §2B1.1(b)(10)
8
describes "sophisticated means" as especially complex or intricate conduct such as hiding assets
9
or transactions through the use of fictitious entities, corporate shells, or offshore financial
10
accounts. While it is true that the overall conspiracy involving Richard Ayvazyan was
11

12 sophisticated and used a number of fake businesses and bank accounts to apply for and conceal

13 the fraud, the same is not true from Ms. Dadyan. She, and her husband and cousin, used their
14
real names and their legitimate companies to apply for loans. The fraud was in misstating
15
employee numbers and the need for the funds, for which she must be held accountable and for
16
which she readily admits and accepts responsibility. However, her loans were not sophisticated
17

18 frauds and she did not conceal her identity or move the money through several different accounts,

19 nor did she create false entities to or shell accounts and the like. The sophisticated means
20
adjustment should not be applied to Ms. Dadyan's relevant conduct.
21

22
V.
23

24 MINOR ROLE

25 Contrary to the government's assertion, the defendant was not a leader or organizer.
26
Indeed, she was not even an average participant, like Manuk Grigoryan. She was not involved
27
with any loans outside hers and her husband's, and assisting in translating the application for her
28

6
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 7 of 12 Page ID #:18884

1 cousin's loan. She did not recruit anyone, give orders, or manage any other loans or the
2
movement of money once the proceeds had been received. Her primary involvement in the
3
larger conspiracy was permitting her husband's brother to store notary stamps and identity
4
information in her home. She had no involvement in most of the loans and was involved in less
5

6 than 4% of the loan proceeds.

7 VI.
8
18 U.S.C. 3553(a) FACTORS
9
Title 18 of the United States Code, section 3553(a), governs sentencing. As the Supreme
10
Court wrote in Rita v. United States, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007):
11

12 That provision tells the sentencing judge to consider (1) offense and offender

13 characteristics; (2) the need for a sentence to reflect the basic aims of sentencing, namely (a)
14
“just punishment” (retribution), (b) deterrence, (c) incapacitation, (d) rehabilitation; (3) the
15
sentences legally available; (4) the Sentencing Guidelines; (5) Sentencing Commission policy
16
statements; (6) the need to avoid unwarranted disparities; and (7) the need for restitution. The
17

18 provision also tells the sentencing judge to “impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than

19 necessary, to comply with” the basic aims of sentencing as set out above. [Emphasis omitted.]
20
A sentence of 24 months imprisonment will satisfy the goals stated in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a).
21
1. The nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of
22
the defendant.
23

24 The defendant is a 42 year-old wife and mother of two daughters, ages 13 and 15. Her

25 husband of 17 years is co-defendant Arthur Ayvazyan. Arthur was sentenced to 60 months
26
imprisonment for his role in the offense and faces deportation as a result of the conviction and
27
sentence, meaning Ms. Dadyan will likely be left to raise their two daughters alone. Ms. Dadyan
28

7
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 8 of 12 Page ID #:18885

1 was born in Armenia but is a United States citizen, having arrived in the United States at age 6
2
when her family fled the political upheaval in that country. After fleeing first to Russia and then
3
to Europe, her parents finally made it to America. Her parents had nothing when they arrived
4
and took jobs as a seamstress and driver, respectively. She lived with her parents and her two
5

6 brothers in her grandmother's small apartment. Her parents slept in the living room and were

7 gone most of the time to work. Eventually her parents purchased a home, but it was foreclosed
8
upon and she and her family were separated for six months while they tried to find a home.
9
Ms. Dadyan finished school, received an associate's degree, and then became a real estate
10
agent. The first home she purchased from her earnings was for her parents, where they still live
11

12 today. Ms. Dadyan and her husband, who started a trucking business, both worked hard and

13 have been able to make good lives for themselves and their family. The defendant has no
14
criminal history.
15
As is common among people's who grow up in poverty and as refugees, Ms. Dadyan
16
developed strong financial insecurity. Even as she was able to achieve success in the real estate
17

18 business and provide for her family and her parents, she sometimes felt like there was never

19 enough to be truly safe. Although she had never committed a crime, when her husband's brother,
20
Richard Ayvazyan, discussed his idea to defraud the government by applying for Covid Business
21
Loans, the defendant was sadly tempted to see if she could acquire these government funds as
22
well. Her husband assured her that Richard was trustworthy and that anyone and everyone was
23

24 applying for these loans whether they needed it or not. While it was true that her business was

25 suffering during the pandemic, she admittedly filed applications for loans for her business that
26
contained false information in order to acquire more money than she was entitled to receive. She
27

8
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 9 of 12 Page ID #:18886

1 also helped her husband apply for a loan for his business and she assisted her cousin, Vahe
2
Dadyan, in applying for a loan as well.
3
The defendant admitted her involvement to her attorney early on and made it clear she
4
didn't want to fight the case in trial. However, upon urging from her husband and her attorney,
5

6 Fred Minnassian, she agreed to let Richard Ayvazyan's attorney run the case. Her counsel

7 simply joined a multitude of mostly baseless motions filed by Richard's counsel and was shocked
8
to learn that, as trial approached, her counsel had done nothing to prepare and had not even
9
begun discussing a possible plea with the government. On the eve of trial, after her requested
10
continuance was denied, her attorney desperately "negotiated" a plea that contained false
11

12 statements regarding the extent of the defendant's involvement. Feeling she had no choice but to

13 do as her attorney instructed, she pleaded guilty pursuant to the one-sided "agreement." She is
14
now at the mercy of the Court to sentence her according to her actual conduct, and not the hastily
15
and negligently concocted plea agreement.
16
As noted above, the defendant has no criminal history and has been steadily employed
17

18 throughout her adult life. She is close with her children, her parents, and her brothers, and, aside

19 from this disastrous mistake, has been a law abiding and valuable member of her community.
20
She has not violated a single condition of her supervised release and has remained working and
21
taking care of her children during this case. Unlike her co-defendants Richard Ayvazyan and
22
Marietta Terabelian, she has not sought to flee or avoid facing the consequences of her crime.
23

24 2. The punitive, deterrent, public safety, and rehabilitative needs for the sentence

25 imposed.
26
The defendant is not a drug or alcohol addict, is educated, does not suffer from mental
27
health issues, and has no criminal record. Her actions in this case are completely contrary to the
28

9
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 10 of 12 Page ID #:18887

1 rest of her life, and she therefore he has no rehabilitative needs. The public is not endangered by
2
her release despite the government's protestations, as shown by her lack of any criminal record
3
and her performance on release. Nor can deterrence, at least as to this defendant, be a serious
4
consideration. Her life has already been turned upside down by her and her husband's actions,
5

6 and he is going to prison for 5 years. Her real-estate license will likely be suspended or she may

7 lose it all together. Her only concern now is staggering any likely prison time with her husband
8
so her children are not left without a parent and then putting in the work again to rebuild her life
9
and start over. She is well aware that she faces prison time for her role in the offense, and the
10
two years required by the aggravated identity theft charge are more than sufficient to deter any
11

12 future criminal temptation.

13 She understands the need of the government and the public to mete out punishment for
14
law breakers. She accepts that consequence of her actions. However, any punishment that
15
involves incarceration beyond the two years will serve more punish her parents and children,
16
who rely on her to support and care for them. A lengthy prison sentence, such as the 22 years
17

18 requested by the government, serves less to punish and more to simply feed the sadistic need of

19 some people in the government to completely destroy and throw away the life of someone who
20
makes a first time mistake. 24 months incarceration is more than sufficient to satisfy the needs
21
of sentencing, including punishment, and any additional prison time does nothing but magnify
22
the suffering already being experienced by her family. The defendant's age, criminal history,
23

24 education, work history, family ties, and mental health status make recidivism extremely

25 unlikely.
26
///
27
///
28

10
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 11 of 12 Page ID #:18888

1 3. The kinds of sentence available.
2
The court is not prohibited from any sentencing option. Count 24, for 18 U.S.C. §1028A
3
requires a consecutive 2 year prison term.
4
4. The Guidelines sentencing range.
5

6 The parties disagree as to the guideline range; however, the defendant contends that the

7 proper range is 30 to 37 months with a mandatory 24 month consecutive term for the 1028A
8
charge. The defendant requests a sentence of 24 months incarceration.
9
5. Policy statements.
10
The Sentencing commission does not appear to have drafted any relevant policy
11

12 statements. However, the cost of incarcerating this non-violent and non-threatening defendant is

13 approximately $37,500 per year according to the Bureau of Prisons, a cost that serves neither to
14
protect the public nor advance any other aim of sentencing. The defendant is already obligated
15
to pay restitution. The entirety of that restitution will be lost by incarcerating the defendant for
16
any period near what the government recommends.
17

18 6. The need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities.

19 The highest sentence received by any co-defendant in this case was appropriately for
20
Richard Ayvazyan, for 17 years for his role in the entirety of the $21.7 Million conspiracy. He
21
and his wife have both fled the country and abandoned their children rather than face the
22
consequences of their conduct.
23

24 Her husband, Arthur Ayvazyan, received 5 years for his involvement after losing at trial.

25 Her cousin, who she assisted by translating the application for him, received 1 year and 1 day
26
after going to trial. Manuk Grigoryan, who was heavily involved and made nearly $3.4 Million
27
from the scheme, received 6 years incarceration. The defendant is most similar to defendant
28

11
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 1174 Filed 11/30/21 Page 12 of 12 Page ID #:18889

1 Paronyan, who pleaded guilty, and who was involved in approximately $430,187 in loans. He
2
received 30 months for his involvement; however, Mr. Paronyan had a somewhat extensive
3
criminal history, noted to be category III but reduced to category II at sentencing.
4
A sentence anywhere close to the 22 years requested by the government would be a gross
5

6 miscarriage of justice. Based on the guidelines, her criminal history, her personal history, and

7 the sentences of her co-defendants, a sentence of 24 months is exactly in line with her co-
8
defendants based on her relevant conduct in the case.
9
7. The need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.
10
As noted, the defendant will be ordered to pay restitution, which he will do according to a
11

12 payment plan instituted upon a financial evaluation. The defendant is currently working and

13 prepared to make full restitution, provided she will be able to remain employed after any
14
sentence.
15

16
VII.
17

18 CONCLUSION

19 Based on the foregoing, the defendant respectfully requests a sentence of 24 months
20
incarceration.
21

22
Date: November 29, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
23

24 /s/ Jerry Kaplan
JERRY KAPLAN
25 Attorneys for Defendant
TAMARA DADYAN
26

12
DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

File and source

File: 1174.pdf
Size: 246,004 bytes
SHA-256: 5a8b3b18cbccee66ab5d13a88b5206d5784e08216ce2debb98aa47df102ed50d
Our copy: 1174.pdf
Original: No public link identified.