Information — United States v. Antawn Davis (D. Mass.)

Summary

A criminal information in United States of America v. Antawn Davis, No. 1:24-cr-10167, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, filed June 10, 2024 as Document 23. It charges one count of wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and one count of false statements under 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), with a forfeiture allegation seeking $49,999 as a money judgment. The information alleges that Davis submitted PPP loan applications with a falsified 2020 Schedule C claiming gross income of $105,901, receiving $20,833 through Benworth Capital Partners LLC on or about April 28, 2021 and $29,166 through Harvest Small Business Finance, LLC on or about June 3, 2021. It alleges the funds were spent on non-business-related expenses. The signature block names Acting United States Attorney Joshua S. Levy and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sarah Hoefle and Lucy Sun.

Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page 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 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page1of9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

imi 24CR10167
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Criminal No.

Violations:
Vv.
Count One: Wire Fraud

ANTAWN DAVIS, (18 U.S.C. § 1343)

Defendant Count Two: False Statements

(18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2))

Forfeiture Allegation:
(18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and

28 U.S.C. § 2461(c))

INFORMATION

At all times relevant to this Information:

General Allegations

1, Defendant ANTAWN DAVIS (“DAVIS”) was a resident of Massachusetts.

2. Benworth Capital Partners LLC (“Benworth”) was a financial institution based in
Florida and facilitated small-business lending.

3. Harvest Small Business Finance, LLC (“Harvest”) was a financial institution

based in California and facilitated small-business lending.

4. Digital Federal Credit Union (“DCU”) was a financial institution based in
Massachusetts.
5; The United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an agency of the

executive branch of the United States government. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and

strengthen the nation’s economy by enabling the establishment and viability of small businesses
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page 2of9

and by assisting in the economic recovery of communities after disasters. As part of this effort,
the SBA enabled and provided for loans, guaranteed by the government, through banks, credit
unions, and other lenders.

The CARES Act and the Paycheck Protection Program

6. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a
federal law enacted in March 2020 to provide emergency financial assistance to Americans
suffering economic harm as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among other things, the
CARES Act provided funding for forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and
certain other expenses through the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). The PPP allowed
eligible borrowers that previously received a PPP loan to apply for a “Second Draw” PPP loan
with the same general terms as their first PPP loan, which was sometimes referred to as the “First
Draw” PPP loan.

Ve PPP loans were required to be used by the business on certain permissible
expenses, namely, payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The PPP allowed the
interest and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spent the loan
proceeds on these expenses within a designated period of time and used at least a minimum
amount of the PPP loan proceeds toward payroll expenses.

8. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required to submit a PPP loan
application signed by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP loan application
required the business (through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the program rules
and make certain affirmative certifications in order to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan. One

such certification required the applicant to affirm that “[t]he [PPP loan] funds w[ould] be used to
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page 3of9

retain workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage interest payments, lease payments, and
utility payments.” The applicant (through its authorized representative) was also required to
acknowledge that “I understand that if the funds are knowingly used for unauthorized purposes,
the federal government may hold me legally liable, such as for charges of fraud” and “TI
understand that knowingly making a false statement to obtain a guaranteed loan from SBA is
punishable under the law, including under 18 U.S.C. 1001,” among other things. In the PPP loan
application, the applicant was also required to state, among other things, its (a) average monthly
payroll expenses and (b) number of employees. Lenders used these figures to calculate the
amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the PPP. The applicant was
also required to provide documentation showing its payroll expenses. The Second Draw PPP
loan application additionally required the applicant to certify that the applicant “used the full
loan amount . . . of the First Draw [PPP] Loan only for eligible expenses.”

9. Participating financial institutions, including Benworth and Harvest, received and
processed business’s PPP loan applications. Ifa PPP loan application was approved, the
participating financial institution would fund the PPP loan using its own monies, which were
guaranteed by the SBA.

Scheme to Defraud

10. Between April 2021 and June 2021, in the District of Massachusetts, and
elsewhere, DAVIS devised a scheme to defraud and fraudulently obtain pandemic relief funds by
filing false and fraudulent PPP loan applications for his purported company (the “company”),
which resulted in DAVIS receiving $49,999. DAVIS thereafter misused the loan proceeds in

ways that were not connected to the borrower’s payroll, utilities, rent, or mortgage payments.
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page 4of9

11. | Onor about April 20, 2021, DAVIS electronically submitted a PPP loan
application to Benworth that contained false statements and falsified tax documents (the “First
Draw PPP Loan Application”). DAVIS’ First Draw PPP Loan Application claimed that he was
the sole proprietor of a company established in 2019, located at DAVIS’ personal residence, and
that the company’s gross income from 2020 was $105,901. As part of his application, DAVIS
submitted a falsified Schedule C for the 2020 tax year that bore DAVIS’ name and Social
Security number. The Schedule C claimed that DAVIS’ principal business or profession was
“chef” and had a 2020 gross income of $105,901. In fact, IRS records do not show any record of
tax returns filed under DAVIS’ Social Security number for tax year 2020.

12. In reliance on DAVIS’ First Draw PPP Loan Application, Benworth approved the
loan, and on or about April 28, 2021, the loan amount of $20,833 was disbursed into DAVIS’
DCU checking account.

13. Within approximately one month of receiving the $20,833 PPP loan, DAVIS
depleted his DCU checking account through a series of transactions and spent the PPP funds on
non-business-related expenses.

14. On or about May 20, 2021, DAVIS electronically submitted a PPP loan
application to Harvest that contained false statements and falsified tax documents (the “Second
Draw PPP Loan Application”). Consistent with his First Draw PPP Loan Application, DAVIS’
Second Draw PPP Loan Application claimed that he was the sole proprietor of a company
established in 2019, located at DAVIS’ personal residence, and that the company’s gross income

from 2020 was $105,901. As part of his application, DAVIS submitted the same falsified
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page5of9

Schedule C for the 2020 tax year that he had submitted in his First Draw PPP Loan Application,
detailed above.

15. Inreliance on DAVIS’ Second Draw PPP Loan Application, Harvest approved
the loan, and on or about June 3, 2021, the loan amount of $29,166 was disbursed into DAVIS’
DCU checking account.

16. Within approximately three weeks of receiving the $29,166 PPP loan, DAVIS
depleted his DCU checking account by approximately $26,400 through a series of transactions,

none of which were business-related expenses.
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page 6of9

COUNT ONE
Wire Fraud
(18 U.S.C. § 1343)
The Acting United States Attorney charges:
17. The Acting United States Attorney re-alleges and incorporates by reference
paragraphs 1-16 of this Information.
18. On or about April 20, 2021, in the District of Massachusetts, and elsewhere, the
defendant,
ANTAWN DAVIS,
having devised and intending to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and for obtaining money
and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and
promises, did transmit and cause to be transmitted by means of wire communications in
interstate and foreign commerce, writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds for the purpose of
executing the scheme to defraud, to wit, a fraudulent PPP loan application that contained

materially false information for the purpose of executing the scheme to defraud.

All in violation of Title 18, United State Code, Section 1343.
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page 7 of 9

COUNT TWO

False Statements
(18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2))

The Acting United States Attorney further charges:

19. The Acting United States Attorney re-alleges and incorporates by reference
paragraphs 1-16 of this Information.

20. On or about April 20, 2021, in the District of Massachusetts, and elsewhere, the
defendant,

ANTAWN DAVIS,

knowingly and willfully made a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement and
representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the Government of
the United States, that is, false statements in an application for PPP loan funds, including false
statements regarding the fact that he operated a business, the nature of the business he operated,
the income that business provided, and his intent to use the PPP loan funds for business
purposes.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001(a)(2).
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page 8of9

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION
(18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c))

The Acting United States Attorney further alleges:
21. Upon conviction of the offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1343, set forth in Count One, the defendant,
ANTAWN DAVIS,
shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C),
and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any property, real or personal, which
constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offense. The property to be forfeited
includes, but is not limited to, the following asset:
a. $49,999, to be entered in the form of a forfeiture money judgment.

22. Ifany of the property described in Paragraph 21, above, as being forfeitable
pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United States Code,
Section 2461(c), as a result of any act or omission of the defendant --

a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;
c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;

d. has been substantially diminished in value; or

e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without
difficulty;
Case 1:24-cr-10167-JEK Document 23 Filed 06/10/24 Page9of9

it is the intention of the United States, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c),
incorporating Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p), to seek forfeiture of any other
property of the defendant up to the value of the property described in Paragraph 21 above.

All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United

States Code, Section 2461(c).

JOSHUA S. LEVY
Acting United States Attorney
Sarah Hoefle :

Lucy Sun

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

Date: June 10, 2024


File and source

File

23-major-prep-tsv-rank-41.pdf

Size

4,360,376 bytes

SHA-256

f41c3b774096905b2bc9fc650e76608a00adeb0427d885f8922529ef06865063

Our copy

23-major-prep-tsv-rank-41.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)