Plea Agreement — United States v. Zishan Alvi (N.D. Ill., Dkt. 64)

Summary

A Plea Agreement, Document #: 64, filed 09/30/24 in Case: 1:23-cr-00142, No. 23 CR 142, United States of America v. Zishan Alvi, in the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, before Judge John J. Tharp, Jr. The indictment charged wire fraud (Counts 1-10) and theft of government funds (Count 11), and Alvi agrees to plead guilty to Count Seven, wire fraud, and to a forfeiture judgment. In the factual basis he admits that he owned and operated a laboratory that billed the Health Resources and Services Administration for COVID-19 tests that were never performed, including about 85,066 unprocessed tests, and that HRSA paid at least approximately $14 million. The agreement sets a statutory maximum of 20 years and calculates offense level components, including a 20-level loss increase.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 1 of 22 PagelD #:179

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT le yy Mp ? So
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Ur oe: 90 ly

EASTERN DIVISION Seipy “p
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA "Yay
No. 23 CR 142 “Ope,
Judge John J. Tharp, Jr.
ZISHAN ALVI

PLEA AGREEMENT

1. This Plea Agreement between the Acting United States Attorney for the
Northern District of Ilinois, MORRIS PASQUAL, and defendant ZISHAN ALVI, and
his attorneys, THOMAS BREEN, ROBERT STANLEY, and CHRISTOPHER
DALLAS, is made pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
and is governed in part by Rule 11(c)(1)(A), as more fully set forth below. The parties
to this Agreement have agreed upon the following:

Charges in This Case

2. The indictment in this case charges defendant with wire fraud, in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343 (Counts 1-10), and theft of
government funds, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 641 (Count
11).

3. Defendant has read the charges against him contained in the
indictment, and those charges have been fully explained to him by his attorney.

4, Defendant fully understands the nature and elements of the crimes with

which he has been charged.
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 2 of 22 PagelD #:180

Charge to Which Defendant Is Pleading Guilty

5. By this Plea Agreement, defendant agrees to enter a voluntary plea of
euilty to the following count of the indictment: Count Seven, which charges defendant
with wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343. In
addition, as further provided below, defendant agrees to the entry of a forfeiture
judgment.

Factual Basis

6. Defendant will plead guilty because he is in fact guilty of the charge
contained in Count One of the indictment. In pleading guilty, defendant admits the
following facts, and that those facts establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and
establish a basis for forfeiture of the property described elsewhere in this Plea
Agreement:

Beginning in or around February 2021, and continuing through in or around
February 2022, at Chicago, in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, and
elsewhere, defendant ZISHAN ALVI, along with others, knowingly devised, intended
to devise, and participated in a scheme to defraud, and to obtain money and property —
by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and
promises, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

In particular, defendant owned and operated a laboratory (Laboratory A),
located on the northwest side of Chicago, from approximately November 2020

through February 2022. Laboratory A performed testing for COVID-19 using both
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 3 of 22 PagelD #:181

polymerase chain reaction (“PCR”) tests and rapid tests. Laboratory A offered walk-
in services and also paid individuals who collected and delivered patient specimens
for COVID-19 testing to Laboratory A from across the Chicagoland area and the
country. Consultant A was a consultant for Laboratory A who designed software for
Laboratory A that compiled billing-related information associated with test
specimens, interpreted PCR test results, and generated e-mails with test results to
individuals whose specimens purportedly had been tested. Throughout the period of
time it was open, Laboratory A submitted claims for reimbursement for COVID-19
tests that it purportedly processed to the Health Resources and Services
Administration (“HRSA”), an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services that oversaw and administered federal funds that covered the cost of
COVID-19 tests for uninsured individuals.

During the relevant time period, defendant caused Laboratory A to bill HRSA
for COVID-19 tests that were never actually performed. Moye specifically, beginning
in March 2021 and continuing through January 2022, at defendant’s instruction,
when patients complained about the time it took Laboratory A to test their specimens
for COVID-19, Laboratory A released to the patients test results which reported the
patient was negative for COVID-19 infection, even though Laboratory A had not
actually tested the specimens. Defendant knew that this was wrong, but did it to
maintain the appearance that Laboratory A could timely provide COVID-19 test

results. In addition, at times during this period, for specimens that were tested,
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 4 of 22 PagelD #:182

defendant instructed Laboratory A employees and consultants to release test results
to the patients as negative when the results had in fact been inconclusive.

From the fall of 2021 through January 2022, during the Omicron COVID-19
surge, Laboratory A reccived more patient specimens than it could test for COVID-
19. At times during this period, test specimens were piled up in garbage bags at
Laboratory A. At defendant’s instruction, Laboratory A employees logged specimens
into Laboratory A’s computer system but did not test them for COVID-19. At
defendant’s instruction, Laboratory A employees threw away untested, weeks-old
specimens, but released purported test results to patients as negative for COVID-19.
At defendant’s instruction, certain Laboratory A employees and consultants
knowingly billed HRSA for COVID-19 tests that were never processed because the
specimens had been discarded. During this time period, some of the patients who
\ -yeceived negative test results for specimens that Laboratory A did not test were also
tested at a separate laboratory who confirmed that those patients were, in fact,
COVID-19 positive.

On or about January 2, 2022, defendant instructed Consultant A to bill HRSA
for specimens that defendant knew were not processed and had been thrown away by
Laboratory A employees at defendant’s direction. In an email entitled “Pending
Results done but not reported,” defendant wrote to Consultant A that Laboratory A
had processed specimens between December 8, 2021 through December 26, 2021,

which defendant knew was false. In actuality, Laboratory A had not processed the
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 5 of 22 PagelD #:183

majority of those tests. As a result of this email, Laboratory A billed HRSA for
approximately 85,066 unprocessed tests.

As alleged in Count Seven, on or about December 24, 2021, at Chicago, in the
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, and elsewhere, defendant, for the
purpose of executing the scheme, knowingly caused to be transmitted by means of
wire communication in interstate commerce certain writings, signs, and signals,
namely, a claim for a purposed PCR test for Individual D.C. performed on December
- 16, 2021, that was not performed as billed, which claim was processed through HRSA
servers located outside of [inois, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
1343. At defendant’s direction, the test specimen associated with Individual D.C.
(among others) was not processed by Laboratory A but was nevertheless billed to
HRSA as having been processed.

Defendant acknowledges that, as a result of the scheme, HRSA paid at least
approximately $14 million to Laboratory A for COVID-19 tests that were not
performed as billed. The fraudulently obtained funds were deposited into a
Laboratory A bank account and portions of the funds were subsequently:

a. transferred to defendant’s personal bank account ending in 3933;
an E*Trade account ending in 5843; a Fidelity Investments account ending in 6785;
and a Coinbase account associated with Coinbase User ID

Ba2db8a7f9650a00c3d0064e; and
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 6 of 22 PagelD #:184

b. used to purchase a 2021 Mercedes-Benz GLB 250; a 2021 Land
Rover Range Rover HSE; and a 2022 Tesla X.

Maximum Statutory Penalties

7. Defendant understands that the charge to which he is pleading guilty
carries the following statutory penalties:

a. A maximum sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment. This offense also
carries a maximum fine of $250,000, or twice the gross gain or gross loss resulting
from that offense, whichever is greater. Defendant further understands that the
judge also may impose a term of supervised release of not more than three years.

b. Defendant fiw'ther understands that the Court must order
restitution to the victims of the offense in an amount determined by the Court.

C. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3013, defendant

“\ swill be assessed $100 on the charge to which he has pled guilty, in addition to any

other penalty or restitution imposed.

Sentencing Guidelines Calculations

8. Defendant understands that, in determining a sentence, the Court is
obligated to calculate the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range, and to consider
that range, possible departures under the Sentencing Guidelines, and other
sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), which include: (i) the nature and
circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (a1)

the need for the sentence imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 7 of 22 PagelD #:185

respect for the law, provide just punishment for the offense, afford adequate
deterrence to criminal conduct, protect the public from further crimes of the
defendant, and provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training,
medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; (111) the
kinds of sentences available; (iv) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities
among defendants with similar records who have been found euilty of similar
conduct; and (v) the need to provide restitution to any victim of the offense.

9. For purposes of calculating the Sentencing Guidelines, the parties agree
on the following points, except as specified below:

a. Applicable Guidelines. The Sentencing Guidelines to be
considered in this case are those in effect at the time of sentencing. The following
statements regarding the calculation of the Sentencing Guidelines are based on the
Guidelines Manual currently in effect, namely the 2023 Guidelines Manual.

b. Offense Level Calculations.

1. The base offense level is 7, pursuant to Guideline
§ 2B1.1(a)(1).
ul. The offense level is increased by 20 levels, pursuant to
Guideline § 2B1.1(b)(1)(K), because the amount of loss is greater than $9,500,000, but
does not exceed $25,000,000.
ill. The offense level is increased by 2 levels, pursuant to

Guideline § 2B1.1(b)(10)(C), because the offense involved sophisticated means and
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 8 of 22 PagelD #:186

the defendant intentionally engaged in or caused the conduct constituting
sophisticated means.

iv. The offense level is increased by 2 levels, pursuant to
Guideline § 3B1.1(c), because the defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or
supervisor in the criminal activity.

v. The offense level is increased by 2 levels, pursuant to
Guideline § 3B1.3, because the defendant abused a position of public and private trust
in a manner that significantly facilitated the commission of the offense.

vi. If the Court determines at the time of sentencing that
defendant has clearly demonstrated a recognition and affirmative acceptance of
personal responsibility for his criminal conduct within the meaning of Guideline
§ 3E1.1(a), including by furnishing the United States Attorney's Office and the
Probation Office with all requested financial information relevant to his ability to
satisfy any fine or restitution that may be imposed in this case, a two-level reduction
in the offense level will be appropriate. The government reserves the right to take
whatever position it deems appropriate at the time of sentencing with respect to
whether defendant has accepted responsibility within the meaning of Guideline
§ 8E1.1(a).

Vil. If the Court determines that defendant has fully accepted
responsibility within the meaning of Guideline § 3E1.1(a), and that the offense level

is 16 or higher prior to the application of any reduction for acceptance of responsibility
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 9 of 22 PagelD #:187

pursuant to § 3E1.1(a), the government will move for an additional one-level
reduction in the offense level pursuant to Guideline § 3E1.1(b) because defendant has
timely notified the government of his intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby
permitting the government to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the Court to
allocate its resources efficiently.

Vil. It is the defendant’s position that because he did not
receive any criminal history points from Chapter Four, Part A, and otherwise meets
the criteria set forth in Guideline § 4C1.1(a), the offense level is decreased by 2 levels.
It is the government’s position that, because defendant receives an adjustment under
Guideline § 3B1.1 (Aggravating Role), he does not meet the criteria set forth in
Guideline § 4C1.1(a).

C. Criminal History Category. With regard to determining
defendant’s criminal history points and criminal history category, based on the facts
now known to the government, defendant’s criminal history points equal zero and
defendant’s criminal history category is I.

dl. Anticipated Advisory Sentencing Guidelines Range.
Therefore, based on the facts now known to the government, if defendant receives a
three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, it is the government’s position
that the anticipated offense level will be 30, which, when combined with the
anticipated criminal history category of I, results in an anticipated advisory

sentencing guidelines range of 97 to 121 months’ imprisonment, in addition to any

9
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 10 of 22 PagelD #:188

supervised release, fine, and restitution the Court may impose. If defendant does not
receive a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, it is the government’s
position that the anticipated offense level will be 33, which, when combined with the
anticipated criminal history category of I, results in an anticipated advisory
sentencing guidelines range of 135 to 168 months’ imprisonment, in addition to any
supervised release, fine, and restitution the Court may impose. It is the defense’s
position that the anticipated offense level will be 28, which, when combined with the
anticipated criminal history category of I, results in an anticipated advisory
sentencing guidelines range of 78 to 97 months’ imprisonment, in addition to any
supervised release, fine, and restitution that the Court may impose.

e. Defendant and his attorney and the government acknowledge
that the above guidelines calculations are preliminary in nature, and are non-binding
..'predictions upon which neither party is entitled to rely. Defendant understands that
further review of the facts or applicable legal principles may lead the government to
conclude that different or additional guidelines provisions apply in this case.
Defendant understands that the Probation Office will conduct its own investigation
and that the Court ultimately determines the facts and law relevant to sentencing,
and that the Court’s determinations govern the final guideline calculation.
Accordingly, the validity of this Agreement is not contingent upon the probation

officer’s or the Court’s concurrence with the above calculations, and defendant shall

10
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 11 of 22 PagelD #:189

not have a right to withdraw his plea on the basis of the Court’s rejection of these
calculations.

10. Both parties expressly acknowledge that this Agreement is not governed
by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(B), and that errors in applying or interpreting any of the
sentencing guidelines may be corrected by either party prior to sentencing. The
parties may correct these errors either by stipulation or by a statement to the
Probation Office or the Court, setting forth the disagreement regarding the applicable
provisions of the guidelines. The validity of this Agreement will not be affected by
such corrections, and defendant shall not have a right to withdraw his plea, nor the
government the right to vacate this Agreement, on the basis of such corrections.

Agreements Relating to Sentencing

11. Each party is free to recommend whatever sentence it deems
appropriate:

12. It is understood by the parties that the sentencing judge is neither a
party to nor bound by this Agreement and may impose a sentence up to the maximum
penalties as set forth above. Defendant further acknowledges that if the Court does
not accept the sentencing recommendation of the parties, defendant will have no right
to withdraw his guilty plea.

13. Regarding restitution, defendant acknowledges that pursuant to Title

18, United States Code, Section 3663A, the Court must order defendant to make full

11
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 12 of 22 PagelD #:190

restitution to victim(s) in an amount to be determined by the Court at sentencing,
which amount shall reflect credit for any funds repaid prior to sentencing.

14. Restitution shall be due immediately, and paid pursuant to a schedule
to be set by the Court at sentencing. Defendant acknowledges that pursuant to Title
18, United States Code, Section 3664(k), he is required to notify the Court and the
United States Attorney’s Office of any material change in economic circumstances
that might affect his ability to pay restitution.

15. Defendant agrees to pay the special assessment of $100 at the time of
sentencing with a cashier’s check or money order payable to the Clerk of the U.S.
District Court.

16. Defendant agrees that the United States may enforce collection of any
fine ox restitution imposed in this case pursuant to Title 18, United States Code,
Sections 3572, 3613, and 3664(m), and Title 31, United States Code, Sections 3711,
3716, and 3728, notwithstanding any payment schedule set by the Court.

17. After sentence has been imposed on the count to which defendant pleads
guilty as agreed herein, the government will move to dismiss the remaining counts of
the indictment as to defendant, as well as paragraph 2(a) of the forfeiture allegation.

Forfeiture
18. Defendant understands that, by pleading guilty, he will subject to

forfeiture to the United States all right, title, and interest that he has in any property

12
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 13 of 22 PagelD #:191

constituting or derived from proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of
the offense.

19. Defendant agrees to forfeiture of the following specific property to the
United States: approximately $6,825,089 in ZISHAN ALVPs personal bank account
ending in 3933; approximately $631,957.04 in an E*Trade account ending in 5843;
approximately $500,000 in a Fidelity Investment account ending in 6785; anda 2021
Land Rover Range Rover HSE bearing VIN SALGS2RU1MA455040, as alleged in the
indictment.

20. In doing so, defendant admits that the property described above
yepresents proceeds defendant obtained as a result of the wire fraud offense, as
alleged in the indictment. Defendant consents to the immediate entry of a
preliminary order of forfeiture as to this specific property, thereby extinguishing any
ryight, title, or interest defendant has in it. If any of the specific property is not yet in
the custody of the United States, defendant agrees to seizure of that property so that
it may be disposed of according to law.

21. Defendant acknowledges that on or about March 17, 2028, March 20,
2023, and March 22, 2023, administrative forfeiture proceedings were commenced
against certain property, including a Coinbase account associated with Coinbase User
ID 5a2db8a7f9650a00c3d0064e; a 2022 Tesla X bearing VIN 7SAXCBE66NF331823;
and a 2021 Mereedes-Benz GLB250W4 bearing VIN WIN4M4HB2MW 138458. By

signing this plea agreement, defendant acknowledges that he had notice of the

13
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 14 of 22 PagelD #:192

administrative forfeiture proceeding, relinquishes any right, title, and interest he
may have had in this property, withdraws any previously filed claims, and
understands that an administrative decree of forfeiture has been entered, or will be
entered, thereby extinguishing any claim he may have had in the seized property.
22. Defendant understands that forfeiture shall not be treated as
satisfaction of any fine, restitution, cost of imprisonment, or any other penalty the
Court may impose upon defendant in addition to the forfeiture judgment. In this case,
however, the United States Attorney’s Office will recommend to the Attorney General
that any net proceeds derived from any forfeited assets be remitted or restored to
eligible victims of the offense pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(e),
Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 9, and other applicable law.
'- 93. Defendant agrees to waive all constitutional, statutory, and equitable
‘. challenges in any manner, including but not limited to direct appeal or a motion
brought under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255, to any forfeiture carried
out in accordance with this agreement on any grounds, including that the forfeiture
constitutes an excessive fine or punishment. The waiver in this paragraph does not

apply to a claim of involuntariness or ineffective assistance of counsel.

14
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 15 of 22 PagelD #:193

Acknowledgments and Waivers Regarding Plea of Guilty

Nature of Agreement

24. This Agreement is entirely voluntary and represents the entire
agreement between the United States Attorney and defendant regarding defendant's
criminal liability in case 23 CR 142.

25. This Agreement concerns criminal liability only. Except as expressly set
forth in this Agreement, nothing herein shall constitute a limitation, waiver, or
release by the United States or any of its agencies of any administrative or judicial
civil claim, demand, or cause of action it may have against defendant or any other
person or entity. The obligations of this Agreement are limited to the United States
Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois and cannot bind any other
federal, state, or local prosecuting, administrative, or regulatory authorities, except
as expressly set forth in this Agreement.

Waiver of Rights

26. Defendant understands that, by pleading guilty, he surrenders certain
rights, including the following:

a. Trial rights. Defendant has the right to persist in a plea of not
guilty to the charges against him, and if he does, he would have the right to a public
and speedy trial.

1. The trial could be either a jury trial or a trial by the judge

sitting without a jury. However, in order that the trial be conducted by the judge

15
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 16 of 22 PagelD #:194

sitting without a jury, defendant, the government, and the judge all must agree that
the trial be conducted by the judge without a jury.

ii, If the trial is a jury trial, the jury would be composed of
twelve citizens from the district, selected at random. Defendant and his attorney
would participate in choosing the jury by requesting that the Court remove
prospective jurors for cause where actual bias or other disqualification is shown, or
by removing prospective jurors without cause by exercising peremptory challenges.

lll. If the trial is a jury trial, the jury would be instructed that
defendant is presumed innocent, that the government has the burden of proving
defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the jury could not convict him
unless, after hearing all the evidence, it was persuaded of his guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt and that it was to consider each count of the indictment separately.
The jury would have to agree unanimously as to each count before it could return a
verdict of guilty or not guilty as to that count.

lv. If the trial is held by the judge without a jury, the judge
would find the facts and determine, after hearing all the evidence, and considering
each count separately, whether or not the judge was persuaded that the government
had established defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

V. At a trial, whether by a jury or a judge, the government

would be required to present its witnesses and other evidence against defendant.

16
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 17 of 22 PagelD #:195

Defendant would be able to confront those government witnesses and his attorney
would be able to cross-examine them.

vi. At a trial, defendant could present witnesses and other
evidence in his own behalf. If the witnesses for defendant would not appear
voluntarily, he could require their attendance through the subpoena power of the
Court. A defendant is not required to present any evidence.

vil. At a trial, defendant would have a privilege against self-
incrimination so that he could decline to testify, and no inference of guilt could be
drawn from his refusal to testify. If defendant desired to do so, he could testify in his
own behalf.

vill. With respect to forfeiture, defendant understands that if
the case were tried before a jury, he would have a right to retain the jury to determine
. whether the government. had established the requisite nexus between defendant’s
offense and any specific property alleged to be subject to forfeiture.

b. Appellate rights. Defendant further understands he is waiving
all appellate issues that might have been available if he had exercised his right to
trial, and may only appeal the validity of this plea of guilty and the sentence imposed.
Defendant understands that any appeal must be filed within 14 calendar days of the
entry of the judgment of conviction.

27. Defendant understands that, by pleading guilty, he is waiving all the

rights set forth in the prior paragraphs, with the exception of the appellate rights

17
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 18 of 22 PagelD #:196

specifically preserved above. Defendant’s attorney has explained those rights to him,
and the consequences of his waiver of those rights.

Presentence Investigation Report/Post-Sentence Supervision

28. Defendant understands that the United States Attorney’s Office in its
submission to the Probation Office as part of the Pre-Sentence Report and at
sentencing shall fully apprise the District Court and the Probation Office of the
nature, scope, and extent of defendant’s conduct regarding the charges against him,
and related matters. The government will make known all matters in aggravation
and mitigation relevant to sentencing.

29. Defendant agrees to truthfully and completely execute a Financial
Statement (with supporting documentation) prior to sentencing, to be provided to and
shared among the Court, the Probation Office, and the United States Attorney’s
Office regarding all details of his financial circumstances, including his recent income
tax returns as specified by the probation officer. Defendant understands that
providing false or incomplete information, or refusing to provide this information,
may be used as a basis for denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility
pursuant to Guideline § 81.1 and enhancement of his sentence for obstruction of
justice under Guideline § 3C1.1, and may be prosecuted as a violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1001 or as a contempt of the Court.

30. For the purpose of monitoring defendant’s compliance with his

obligations to pay a fine and restitution during any term of supervised release or

18
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 19 of 22 PagelD #:197

probation to which defendant is sentenced, defendant further consents to the
disclosure by the IRS to the Probation Office and the United States Attorney’s Office
of defendant’s individual income tax returns (together with extensions,
correspondence, and other tax information) filed subsequent to defendant's
sentencing, to and including the final year of any period of supervised release or
probation to which defendant is sentenced. Defendant also agrees that a certified copy
of this Agreement shall be sufficient evidence of defendant’s request to the IRS to
disclose the returns and return information, as provided for in Title 26, United States
Code, Section 6103(b).

Other Terms

31. Defendant agrees to cooperate with the United States Attorney’s Office
in collecting any ordered fine and restitution for which defendant is liable, including
providing financial statements and supporting records as requested by the United
States Attorney’s Office.

39. Defendant will not object to a motion brought by the United States
Attorney’s Office for the entry of an order authorizing disclosure of documents,
testimony and related investigative materials which may constitute grand jury
material, preliminary to or in connection with any judicial proceeding, pursuant to
Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(E)G). In addition, defendant will not object to the
government’s solicitation of consent from third parties who provided records or other

materials to the grand jury pursuant to grand jury subpoenas, to turn those materials

19
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 20 of 22 PagelD #:198

over to the Civil Division of the United States Attorney’s Office, or an appropriate
federal or state agency (including but not limited to the Internal Revenue Service),
for use in civil or administrative proceedings or investigations, rather than returning
them to the third parties for later summons or subpoena in connection with a civil or
administrative proceeding involving, or investigation of, defendant. Nothing in this
paragraph or the preceding paragraph precludes defendant from asserting any legal
or factual defense to taxes, interest, and penalties that may be assessed by the IRS.

33. Defendant understands that, if convicted, a defendant who is not a
United States citizen may be removed from the United States, denied citizenship, and
denied admission to the United States in the future.

Conclusion

34. Defendant understands that this Agreement will be filed with the Court,
will become a matter of public record, and may be disclosed to any person,

35. Defendant understands that his compliance with each part of this
Agreement extends throughout the period of his sentence, and failure to abide by any
term of the Agreement is a violation of the Agreement. Defendant further
understands that in the event he violates this Agreement, the government, at its
option, may move to vacate the Agreement, rendering it null and void, and thereafter
prosecute defendant not subject to any of the limits set forth in this Agreement, or
may move to resentence defendant or require defendant’s specific performance of this

Agreement. Defendant understands and agrees that in the event that the Court

20
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 21 of 22 PagelD #:199

permits defendant to withdraw from this Agreement, or defendant breaches any of
its terms and the government elects to void the Agreement and prosecute defendant,
any prosecutions that are not time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations on
the date of the signing of this Agreement may be commenced against defendant in
accordance with this paragraph, notwithstanding the expiration of the statute of
limitations between the signing of this Agreement and the commencement of such .
prosecutions.

36. Should the judge refuse to accept defendant's plea of guilty, this
Agreement shall become null and void and neither party will be bound to it.

37. Defendant and his attorney acknowledge that no threats, promises, or
representations have been made, nor agreements reached, other than those set forth

in this Agreement, to cause defendant to plead guilty.

21
Case: 1:23-cr-00142 Document #: 64 Filed: 09/30/24 Page 22 of 22 PagelD #:200

38. Defendant acknowledges that he has read this Agreement and carefully

reviewed each provision with his attorney. Defendant further acknowledges that he

understands and voluntarily accepts each and every term and condition of this

Agreement.

{4-30 - dol

AGREED THIS DATE:

MICHELLE *: Digitally signed by MICHELLE
PETERSEN gf Pate: 2024.09.25 22:00:01 05°00" for MP
MORRIS PASQUAL

Acting United States Attorney

JARED HASTEN
Assistant U.S. Attorneys

CLAIRE SOBCZAK
Trial Attorney

22

ch.

ZISHAN ALVI

THOMAS BREEN
ROBERT STANLEY
CHRISTOPHER DALLAS
Attorneys for Defendant


File and source

File

64.pdf

Size

1,098,506 bytes

SHA-256

ac8e54d83bcb74e158674740889d2ea8fd4439c9226eb7bee1fcfc5fc3e4436e

Our copy

64.pdf

Original

www.justice.gov