Full text
Case 1:21-cr-20160-KMW Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2021 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 21-20160-CR-KMW
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
LEONEL RIVERO,
Defendant.
_______________________________/
GOVERNMENT’S CORRECTIONS AND OBJECTION TO PRESENTENCE
INVESTIGATION REPORT
The United States, by and through the undersigned counsel, files the following corrections
and objection to Defendant Leonel Rivero’s (“Defendant[’s]”) Presentence Investigation Report
(“PSI”). Since the filing of the PSI, the United States has obtained additional information that
impacts the forfeiture money judgment amount, the restitution amount, and the offense conduct
provided in the PSI. In addition, the United States respectfully submits that a two-level increase
to the offense level pursuant to Section § 2B1.1(b)(12) of the Guidelines is not applicable because
the offense did not involve conduct described in 18 U.S.C. § 1040.
DISCUSSION
First, the government submits that the correct forfeiture money judgment amount is
$903,665.56 and not $975,582.00 as the government initially represented. (PSI ¶¶ 4). To
determine the forfeiture money judgment amount, the government relied on a spreadsheet with
data obtained from Square Capital, LLC (“Square”), which summarized information regarding the
Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loans the Defendant submitted to Square, including the total
1
Case 1:21-cr-20160-KMW Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2021 Page 2 of 4
amount paid. That spreadsheet reflected that the total paid amount for the 47 funded loans was
$975,582.00. However, upon further review, it appears that this spreadsheet inadvertently listed
four of the funded loans twice, resulting in the double counting of some of the loan amounts.
Thus, the correct total is $903,665.56. As such, the government respectfully submits that the
forfeiture money judgment amount in Paragraph 4 of the PSI and the disbursement total in
Paragraphs 21 and 35 of the PSI should be changed to reflect the correct total of $903,665.56 as is
consistent with the Amended Preliminary Order of Forfeiture, ECF No. 28.
Second, the government respectfully submits that the total restitution amount is
$1,085,901.56. This amount includes $903,655.56 for the 47 PPP loans obtained from Square;
$32,336.00 for the one PPP loan obtained from Wells Fargo Bank (“Wells Fargo”); and $149,900
got the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) obtained from the Small Business Administration
(“SBA”). 1 Whether restitution is owed to the lender or to the SBA depends on whether the loan at
issue was forgiven by the SBA. Based on information provided by Square and the SBA, the
government understands that of the $903,655.56 in funded PPP loans from Square, $765,059.15
was forgiven. As such, Square is owed approximately $118,291.71 in restitution and the SBA is
owed $765,059.15 in restitution for the Square loans at issue. In addition, the SBA is owed
$149,900 in restitution for the EIDL, which makes the total amount of restitution owed to the SBA
$914,959.15. Finally, the $32,336 in PPP loan funds from Wells Fargo was not forgiven. As
such, $32,336 in restitution is owed to Wells Fargo.
Third, since the filing of the PSI, the government has learned that the Defendant filed
applications seeking loan forgiveness for loans that he knew were fraudulent. The government
1 The PSI states that the amount of the EIDL was $150,000. (PSI ¶ 31). Upon review of the Defendant’s bank
records from Wells Fargo, the government submits that the total amount funded was $149,900.
2
Case 1:21-cr-20160-KMW Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2021 Page 3 of 4
respectfully submits that this new information should be considered by the U.S. Probation Office
and the Court as relevant conduct. Specifically, according to information obtained from Square,
Square received applications seeking loan forgiveness for 46 of the 47 funded PPP loans. This
included an application for loan forgiveness by Defendant, which was submitted to Square on or
about November 16, 2020—just a few weeks after law enforcement conducted a search warrant of
Defendant’s residence in connection with this matter. As a result of his application for loan
forgiveness, Defendant’s own loan from Square in the amount of $15,371.01 was forgiven. In
addition, according to IP information provided by Square, three other applications seeking loan
forgiveness were submitted using the same IP address that Defendant used to submit the 118 PPP
fraudulent loan applications. All three of these loans were forgiven at least in part. Further,
according to information obtained from Wells Fargo and the SBA, Defendant also submitted an
application seeking loan forgiveness for the PPP loan he received from Wells Fargo. This loan
forgiveness application was denied. Again, the application appears to have been submitted after
the search warrant of Defendant’s residence. The government respectfully submits that this new
information—that Defendant submitted applications seeking loan forgiveness for loans that he
knew were fraudulent and submitted those applications after he was visited by law enforcement—
should be included as relevant conduct in the PSI.
Finally, the government submits that a two-level increase to the offense level, pursuant to
Section 2B1.1(b)(12) of the Sentencing Guidelines is not applicable. Section 2B1.1(b)(12)
applies if the offense involved conduct described in 18 U.S.C. § 1040, which prohibits fraud in
connection with major disaster or emergency benefits. However, 18 U.S.C. § 1040 concerns
fraud involving any benefit provided in connection with a major disaster declaration or an
emergency declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act. See 18
3
Case 1:21-cr-20160-KMW Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2021 Page 4 of 4
U.S.C. § 1040(a)(2). Here, the PPP loan funds and EIDL funds were not provided in connection
with a major disaster declaration or an emergency declaration pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Since the offense did not involve conduct
described in 18 U.S.C. § 1040, Section 2B1.1(b)(12) of the Guidelines is not applicable.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the United States respectfully requests that the PSI be
amended to correct the forfeiture money judgment amount to $903,665.56 and to include the
restitution amount of $1,085,901.56 as well as the new information regarding Defendant’s
submission of applications for loan forgiveness. The United States further requests removing the
two-level increase to the offense level pursuant to Section 2B1.1(b)(12) of the Guidelines.
Respectfully submitted,
JOSEPH S. BEEMSTERBOER
Acting Chief
U.S. Department of Justice
Criminal Division, Fraud Section
/s/ Della Sentilles
DELLA SENTILLES
Trial Attorneys
U.S. Department of Justice
Criminal Division, Fraud Section
1400 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20005
Office: (202) 445-8793
Email: Della.Sentilles@usdoj.gov
4