Plea Agreement — United States v. Nabil Dajani (Middle District of Florida, Document 3, filed May 1, 2023)

Summary

Plea Agreement filed May 1, 2023 as Document 3 in United States of America v. Nabil Dajani, Case No. 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c). Nabil Dajani agrees to plead guilty to Counts One, Two, and Three of the Information: conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, 18 U.S.C. § 371; submitting a false claim, 18 U.S.C. § 287; and enticement of another to travel in interstate commerce for the purposes of prostitution, 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a). Restitution to the Small Business Administration is estimated to be at least approximately $732,700, of which approximately $432,700 shall be joint and several with restitution ordered in Case No. 6:20-cr-97-GAP-LRH. It also covers cooperation and forfeiture of $158,188.58 in unrecovered proceeds. The agreement runs 43 pages.

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 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 1 of 43 PagelD 21

AF Approval __ JH Chief Approval ___ RBH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION =

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

i

v. CASE NO. 6:23-cr-85- GA?- EK

NABIL DAJANI

we

PLEA AGREEMENT

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c), the United States of America, by Roger B.

Handberg, United States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, and the

defendant, NABIL DAJANI, and the attorneys for the defendant, Mark NeJame and
Joseph Flynn, mutually agree as follows:

A. Particularized Terms

1. Counts Pleading To

The defendant shall enter a plea of guilty to Counts One, Two, and Three
of the Information. Count One charges the defendant with conspiracy to commit an
offense against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. Count Two charges
the defendant with submitting a false claim, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287. Count
Three charges the defendant with enticement of another to travel in interstate
commerce for the purposes of prostitution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a).

di Maximum Penalties
Counts One and Two each carry a maximum sentence of 5 years’

imprisonment (for a total of up to 10 years’ imprisonment), a fine of up to $250,000,

or twice the gross gain/caused by the offense, or twice the gross loss caused by the

Defendant’s Initials
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 2 of 43 PagelD 22

offense, whichever is greater, a term of supervised release of up to 3 years, and a special
assessment of $100.

Count Three carries a maximum sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment, a
fine of up to $250,000, a term of supervised release of up to 3 years, a special
assessment of $100, and an additional special assessment of $5,000.

With respect to certain offenses, the Court shall order the defendant to
make restitution to any victim of the offenses, and with respect to other offenses, the
Court may order the defendant to make restitution to any victim of the offenses, or to
the community, as set forth below.

3. Elements of the Offenses

The defendant acknowledges understanding the nature and elements of
the offenses with which defendant has been charged and to which defendant is
pleading guilty. The elements of Count One are:

First: Two or more persons in some way agreed to try to
accomplish a shared and unlawful plan;

Second: The defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the plan
and willfully joined in it;

Third: During the conspiracy, one of the conspirators
knowingly engaged in at least one overt act as
described in the Information; and

Fourth: The overt act was committed at or about the time

alleged and with the purpose of carrying out or
accomplishing some object of the conspiracy.

Defendant’s Initials \\ 2
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 3 of 43 PagelD 23

The elements of Count Two are:

First: The defendant knowingly presented a false claim
against the United States to an agency of the United
States;

Second: The claim was based on a false or fraudulent material
fact; and

Third: The defendant acted intentionally and knew that the

claim was false and fraudulent.

The elements of Count Three are:

First: The defendant knowingly attempted to persuade or
entice the Victim to travel in interstate or foreign
commerce; and

Second: The purpose of the travel was for the Victim to
engage in prostitution, or any sexual activity for
which any person can be charged with a criminal
offense.

4, Indictment Waiver

Defendant will waive the right to be charged by way of indictment before
a federal grand jury.

5. No Further Charges

If the Court accepts this plea agreement, the United States Attorney’s
Office for the Middle District of Florida agrees not to charge defendant with
committing any other federal criminal offenses known to the United States

Attorney’s Office at the time of the execution of this agreement.

Defendant’s Initials \ Y 3
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 4 of 43 PagelD 24

6. Mandatory Restitution to Victim of Offense of Conviction
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3663(a) and (b) and 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(a) and

(b), defendant agrees to make full restitution to the Small Business Administration in
an amount as determined by the Court and the Probation Office, which is estimated
to be at least approximately $732,700. Of that amount, approximately $432,700 shall
be joint and several with any restitution ordered in United States v. Joel Micah Greenberg,
Case No. 6:20-cr-97-GAP-LRH. Further, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3664(d)(5), the
defendant agrees not to oppose bifurcation of the sentencing hearing if the victims’
losses are not ascertainable prior to sentencing.

7. Guidelines Sentence

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(B), the United States will
recommend to the Court that the defendant be sentenced within the defendant’s
applicable guidelines range as determined by the Court pursuant to the United States
Sentencing Guidelines, as adjusted by any departure the United States has agreed to
recommend in this plea agreement. The parties understand that such a
recommendation is not binding on the Court and that, if it is not accepted by this
Court, neither the United States nor the defendant will be allowed to withdraw from
the plea agreement, and the defendant will not be allowed to withdraw from the plea
of guilty.

8. Acceptance of Responsibility - Three Levels

At the time of sentencing, and in the event that no adverse information

is received suggesting such a recommendation to be unwarranted, the United States

Defendant’s Initials \\ 4
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 5 of 43 PagelD 25

will recommend to the Court that the defendant receive a two-level downward
adjustment for acceptance of responsibility, pursuant to USSG §3E1.1(a). The
defendant understands that this recommendation or request is not binding on the
Court, and if not accepted by the Court, the defendant will not be allowed to withdraw
from the plea.

Further, at the time of sentencing, if the defendant's offense level prior to
operation of subsection (a) is level 16 or greater, and if the defendant complies with
the provisions of USSG §3E1.1(b) and all terms of this plea agreement, including, but
not limited to, the timely submission of the financial affidavit referenced in Paragraph
B.5., the United States agrees to file a motion pursuant to USSG §3E1.1(b) for a
downward adjustment of one additional level. The defendant understands that the
determination as to whether the defendant has qualified for a downward adjustment
of a third level for acceptance of responsibility rests solely with the United States
Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, and the defendant agrees that the
defendant cannot and will not challenge that determination, whether by appeal,
collateral attack, or otherwise.

9. Cooperation - Substantial Assistance to be Considered

Defendant agrees to cooperate fully with the United States in the
investigation and prosecution of other persons, and to testify, subject to a prosecution
for perjury or making a false statement, fully and truthfully before any federal court

proceeding or federal grand jury in connection with the charges in this case and other

matters, such cooperation to further include a full and complete disclosure of all

Defendant’s Initials \
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 6 of 43 PagelD 26

relevant information, including production of any and all books, papers, documents,
and other objects in defendant's possession or control, and to be reasonably available
for interviews which the United States may require. If the cooperation is completed
prior to sentencing, the government agrees to consider whether such cooperation
qualifies as "substantial assistance" in accordance with the policy of the United States
Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, warranting the filing of a motion at the
time of sentencing recommending (1) a downward departure from the applicable
guideline range pursuant to USSG §5K1.1, or (2) the imposition of a sentence below
a statutory minimum, if any, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), or (3) both. If the
cooperation is completed subsequent to sentencing, the government agrees to consider
whether such cooperation qualifies as "substantial assistance" in accordance with the
policy of the United States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, warranting the
filing of a motion for a reduction of sentence within one year of the imposition of
sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b). In any case, the defendant understands
that the determination as to whether "substantial assistance" has been provided or
what type of motion related thereto will be filed, if any, rests solely with the United
States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, and the defendant agrees that
defendant cannot and will not challenge that determination, whether by appeal,
collateral attack, or otherwise.
10. Use of Information - Section 1B1.8
Pursuant to USSG §1B1.8(a), the United States agrees that no self-

incriminating norman which the defendant may provide during the course of

Defendant’s Initials \\ 6
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 7 of 43 PagelD 27

defendant's cooperation and pursuant to this agreement shall be used in determining
the applicable sentencing guideline range, subject to the restrictions and limitations set
forth in USSG §1B1.8(b).

11. Cooperation - Responsibilities of Parties

a. The government will make known to the Court and other relevant
authorities the nature and extent of defendant's cooperation and any other mitigating
circumstances indicative of the defendant's rehabilitative intent by assuming the
fundamental civic duty of reporting crime. However, the defendant understands that
the government can make no representation that the Court will impose a lesser
sentence solely on account of, or in consideration of, such cooperation.

b. It is understood that should the defendant knowingly provide
incomplete or untruthful testimony, statements, or information pursuant to this
agreement, or should the defendant falsely implicate or incriminate any person, or
should the defendant fail to voluntarily and unreservedly disclose and provide full,
complete, truthful, and honest knowledge, information, and cooperation regarding
any of the matters noted herein, the following conditions shall apply:

(1) The defendant may be prosecuted for any perjury or false
declarations, if any, committed while testifying pursuant to this agreement, or for
obstruction of justice.

(2) The United States may prosecute the defendant for the
charges which are to be difrnisved pursuant to this agreement, if any, and may either

seek reinstatement of or refile such charges and prosecute the defendant thereon in the
\

\\

Defendant’s Initials
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 8 of 43 PagelD 28

event such charges have been dismissed pursuant to this agreement. With regard to
such charges, if any, which have been dismissed, the defendant, being fully aware of
the nature of all such charges now pending in the instant case, and being further aware
of defendant's rights, as to all felony charges pending in such cases (those offenses
punishable by imprisonment for a term of over one year), to not be held to answer to
said felony charges unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, and further
being aware that all such felony charges in the instant case have heretofore properly
been returned by the indictment of a grand jury, does hereby agree to reinstatement of
such charges by recission of any order dismissing them or, alternatively, does hereby
waive, in open court, prosecution by indictment and consents that the United States
may proceed by information instead of by indictment with regard to any felony charges
which may be dismissed in the instant case, pursuant to this plea agreement, and the
defendant further agrees to waive the statute of limitations and any speedy trial claims
on such charges.

(3) The United States may prosecute the defendant for any
offenses set forth herein, if any, the prosecution of which in accordance with this
agreement, the United States agrees to forego, and the defendant agrees to waive the
statute of limitations and any speedy trial claims as to any such offenses.

(4) The government may use against the defendant the
defendant's own admissions and statements and the information and books, papers,
documents, and objects that the defendant has furnished in the course of the

defendant's cooperation bith the government.

Defendant’s Initials \ \ 8
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 9 of 43 PagelD 29

(5) The defendant will not be permitted to withdraw the guilty
pleas to those counts to which defendant hereby agrees to plead in the instant case but,
in that event, defendant will be entitled to the sentencing limitations, if any, set forth
in this plea agreement, with regard to those counts to which the defendant has pled;
or in the alternative, at the option of the United States, the United States may move
the Court to declare this entire plea agreement null and void.

12. Forfeiture of Assets

The defendant agrees to forfeit to the United States immediately and
voluntarily any and all assets and property, or portions thereof, subject to forfeiture,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(a)(1)(C), 2428, and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), whether in the
possession or control of the United States, the defendant or defendant's nominees. The
assets to be forfeited specifically include, but are not limited to, $158,188.58 in
proceeds the defendant admits he obtained, as the result of the commission of the
offenses to which the defendant is pleading guilty.! The defendant acknowledges and
agrees that: (1) the defendant obtained this amount as a result of the commission of
the offenses, and (2) as a result of the acts and omissions of the defendant, the proceeds
have been transferred to third parties and cannot be located by the United States upon

the exercise of due diligence. Therefore, the defendant agrees that, pursuant to 21

' The defendant obtained a total of $315,800 in proceeds as the result of the commission of
the offenses to which the defendant is pleading guilty; however, the United States is seeking
an order of forfeiture in the amount of unrecovered proceeds: $158,188.58. On July 8, 2022,
and July 14, 2022, the Federal Bureau of Investigation administratively forfeited a total of
$157,611.42 in proceed seized from the defendant’s various bank accounts.

\
\

Defendant’s Initials \ 9
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 10 of 43 PagelD 30

U.S.C. § 853(p), the United States is entitled to forfeit any other property of the
defendant (substitute assets), up to the amount of proceeds the defendant obtained, as
the result of the offenses of conviction. The defendant further consents to, and agrees
not to oppose, any motion for substitute assets filed by the United States up to the
amount of proceeds obtained from commission of the offenses and consents to the
entry of the forfeiture order into the Treasury Offset Program. The defendant agrees
that forfeiture of substitute assets as authorized herein shall not be deemed an
alteration of the defendant's sentence.

The defendant additionally agrees that since the criminal proceeds have
been transferred to third parties and cannot be located by the United States upon the
exercise of due diligence, the preliminary and final orders of forfeiture should
authorize the United States Attorney’s Office to conduct discovery (including
depositions, interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and the issuance of
subpoenas), pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(3) of the Fed. R. Crim. P., to help identify,
locate, and forfeit substitute assets.

The defendant also agrees to waive all constitutional, statutory, and
procedural challenges (including direct appeal, habeas corpus, or any other means) to
any forfeiture carried out in accordance with this plea agreement on any grounds,
including that the forfeiture described herein constitutes an excessive fine, was not
properly noticed in the charging instrument, addressed by the Court at the time of the

guilty plea, announced at sentencing, or incorporated into the judgment.

Defendant’s Initials 10
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 11 of 43 PagelD 31

The defendant admits and agrees that the conduct described in the
Factual Basis below provides a sufficient factual and statutory basis for the forfeiture
of the property sought by the government. Pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(4), the defendant
agrees that the preliminary order of forfeiture will satisfy the notice requirement and
will be final as to the defendant at the time it is entered. In the event the forfeiture is
omitted from the judgment, the defendant agrees that the forfeiture order may be
incorporated into the written judgment at any time pursuant to Rule 36.

The defendant agrees to take all steps necessary to identify and locate all
substitute assets and to transfer custody of such assets to the United States before the
defendant’s sentencing. To that end, the defendant agrees to make a full and complete
disclosure of all assets over which defendant exercises control, including all assets held
by nominees, to execute any documents requested by the United States to obtain from
any other parties by lawful means any records of assets owned by the defendant, and
to consent to the release of the defendant’s tax returns for the previous five years. The
defendant agrees to be interviewed by the government, prior to and after sentencing,
regarding such assets. The defendant further agrees to be polygraphed on the issue of
assets, if it is deemed necessary by the United States. The defendant agrees that Fed.
R. Crim. P. 11 and USSG §1B1.8 will not protect from forfeiture assets disclosed by
the defendant as part of the defendant’s cooperation.

The defendant agrees to take all steps necessary to assist the government
in obtaining clear title to any substitute assets before the defendant’s sentencing. In

addition to providing full and complete information about substitute assets, these steps

\

Defendant’s Initials 11
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 12 of 43 PagelD 32

include, but are not limited to, the surrender of title, the signing of a consent decree of
forfeiture, and signing of any other documents necessary to effectuate such transfers.

Forfeiture of the defendant's assets shall not be treated as satisfaction of
any fine, restitution, cost of imprisonment, or any other penalty the Court may impose
upon the defendant in addition to forfeiture.

The defendant agrees that, in the event the Court determines that the
defendant has breached this section of the plea agreement, the defendant may be found
ineligible for a reduction in the Guidelines calculation for acceptance of responsibility
and substantial assistance, and may be eligible for an obstruction of justice
enhancement.

The defendant agrees that the forfeiture provisions of this plea agreement
are intended to, and will, survive the defendant, notwithstanding the abatement of any
underlying criminal conviction after the execution of this agreement. The forfeitability
of any particular property pursuant to this agreement shall be determined as if the
defendant had survived, and that determination shall be binding upon defendant’s
heirs, successors and assigns until the agreed forfeiture, including the forfeiture of any
substitute assets, is final.

13. Sex Offender Registration and Notification

The defendant has been advised and understands, that the offense in
Count Three may be a qualifying offense under the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act, a federal law, and as such the defendant must register and keep the

registration current if each of the following jurisdictions: the location of the

Defendant’s Initials W\ 12

\
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 13 of 43 PagelD 33

defendant’s residence, the location of the defendant’s employment; and, if the
defendant is a student, the location of the defendant’s school. Registration will require
that the defendant provide information that includes name, residence address, and the
names and addresses of any places at which the defendant is or will be an employee or
a student. The defendant understands that he must update his registrations not later
than three business days after any change of name, residence, employment, or student
status. The defendant understands that failure to comply with these obligations
subjects the defendant to prosecution for failure to register under federal law, 18 U.S.C.
§ 2250, which is punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both.

14. Notice of Possibility of Remand Upon Entry of Guilty Plea

The defendant is advised that a finding of guilt will subject the defendant to the
mandatory detention provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) and that the defendant will
be remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals pending sentencing unless 18 U.S.C.
§ 3143(a)(2)(A) & (B) or 18 U.S.C. § 3145(C) applies.

B. Standard Terms and Conditions

1. Restitution, Special Assessment and Fine

The defendant understands and agrees that the Court, in addition to or
in lieu of any other penalty, shall order the defendant to make restitution to any victim
of the offenses, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3663A, for all offenses described in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3663A(c)(1); and the Court may order the defendant to make restitution to any victim
of the offenses, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3663, including restitution as to all counts

charged, whether or not the defendant enters a plea of guilty to such counts, and

Defendant’s Initials 13
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 14 of 43 PagelD 34

whether or not such counts are dismissed pursuant to this agreement. The defendant
further understands that compliance with any restitution payment plan imposed by the
Court in no way precludes the United States from simultaneously pursuing other
statutory remedies for collecting restitution (28 U.S.C. § 3003(b)(2)), including, but
not limited to, garnishment and execution, pursuant to the Mandatory Victims
Restitution Act, in order to ensure that the defendant’s restitution obligation is
satisfied.

On each count to which a plea of guilty is entered, the Court shall impose
a special assessment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013. To ensure that this obligation is
satisfied, the defendant agrees to deliver a cashier’s check, certified check, or money
order to the Clerk of the Court in the amount of $100, payable to "Clerk, U.S. District
Court" within ten days of the change of plea hearing. The defendant understands that
this agreement imposes no limitation as to fine.

2. Supervised Release

The defendant understands that the offenses to which the defendant is
pleading provide for imposition of a term of supervised release upon release from
imprisonment, and that, if the defendant should violate the conditions of release, the
defendant would be subject to a further term of imprisonment.

3. Immigration Consequences of Pleading Guil

The defendant has been advised and understands that, upon conviction,
a defendant who is not a United States citizen may be removed from the United States,

denied citizenship, and dénied admission to the United States in the future.

\

\
Defendant’s Initials _\ | 14
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 15 of 43 PagelD 35

4. Sentencing Information

The United States reserves its right and obligation to report to the Court
and the United States Probation Office all information concerning the background,
character, and conduct of the defendant, to provide relevant factual information,
including the totality of the defendant's criminal activities, if any, not limited to the
counts to which defendant pleads, to respond to comments made by the defendant or
defendant's counsel, and to correct any misstatements or inaccuracies. The United
States further reserves its right to make any recommendations it deems appropriate
regarding the disposition of this case, subject to any limitations set forth herein, if any.

5. Financial Disclosures

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3664(d)(3) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(d)(2)(A)(ii),
the defendant agrees to complete and submit to the United States Attorney's Office
within 30 days of execution of this agreement an affidavit reflecting the defendant's
financial condition. The defendant promises that his financial statement and
disclosures will be complete, accurate and truthful and will include all assets in which
he has any interest or over which the defendant exercises control, directly or indirectly,
including those held by a spouse, dependent, nominee or other third party. The
defendant further agrees to execute any documents requested by the United States
needed to obtain from any third parties any records of assets owned by the defendant,
directly or through a nominee, and, by the execution of this plea agreement, consents

to the release of the defendant's tax returns for the previous five years. The defendant

similarly agrees and authorizes the United States Attorney's Office to provide to, and

Defendant’s Initials \ 15
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 16 of 43 PagelD 36

obtain from, the United States Probation Office, the financial affidavit, any of the
defendant's federal, state, and local tax returns, bank records and any other financial
information concerning the defendant, for the purpose of making any
recommendations to the Court and for collecting any assessments, fines, restitution,
or forfeiture ordered by the Court. The defendant expressly authorizes the United
States Attorney's Office to obtain current credit reports in order to evaluate the
defendant's ability to satisfy any financial obligation imposed by the Court.
6. Sentencing Recommendations

It is understood by the parties that the Court is neither a party to nor
bound by this agreement. The Court may accept or reject the agreement, or defer a
decision until it has had an opportunity to consider the presentence report prepared by
the United States Probation Office. The defendant understands and acknowledges
that, although the parties are permitted to make recommendations and present
arguments to the Court, the sentence will be determined solely by the Court, with the
assistance of the United States Probation Office. Defendant further understands and
acknowledges that any discussions between defendant or defendant's attorney and the
attorney or other agents for the government regarding any recommendations by the
government are not binding on the Court and that, should any recommendations be
rejected, defendant will not be permitted to withdraw defendant's plea pursuant to this
plea agreement. The government expressly reserves the right to support and defend

any decision that the Court may make with regard to the defendant's sentence, whether

_ Defendant’s Initials \\ 16
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 17 of 43 PagelD 37

or not such decision is consistent with the government's recommendations contained
herein.

7. Defendant's Waiver of Right to Appeal the Sentence

The defendant agrees that this Court has jurisdiction and authority to
impose any sentence up to the statutory maximum and expressly waives the right to
appeal defendant's sentence on any ground, including the ground that the Court erred
in determining the applicable guidelines range pursuant to the United States
Sentencing Guidelines, except (a) the ground that the sentence exceeds the defendant's
applicable guidelines range as determined by the Court pursuant to the United States
Sentencing Guidelines; (b) the ground that the sentence exceeds the statutory
maximum penalty; or (c) the ground that the sentence violates the Eighth Amendment
to the Constitution; provided, however, that if the government exercises its right to
appeal the sentence imposed, as authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3742(b), then the defendant
is released from his waiver and may appeal the sentence as authorized by 18 U.S.C. §
3742(a).

8. Middle District of Florida Agreement

It is further understood that this agreement is limited to the Office of the
United States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and cannot bind other
federal, state, or local prosecuting authorities, although this office will bring
defendant's cooperation, if any, to the attention of other prosecuting officers or others,

if requested. /
/

\\
Defendant’s Initials 17
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 18 of 43 PagelD 38

9. Filing of Agreement

This agreement shall be presented to the Court, in open court or in
camera, in whole or in part, upon a showing of good cause, and filed in this cause, at
the time of defendant's entry of a plea of guilty pursuant hereto.

10. Voluntariness

The defendant acknowledges that defendant is entering into this
agreement and is pleading guilty freely and voluntarily without reliance upon any
discussions between the attorney for the government and the defendant and
defendant's attorney and without promise of benefit of any kind (other than the
concessions contained herein), and without threats, force, intimidation, or coercion of
any kind. The defendant further acknowledges defendant's understanding of the
nature of the offense or offenses to which defendant is pleading guilty and the elements
thereof, including the penalties provided by law, and defendant's complete satisfaction
with the representation and advice received from defendant's undersigned counsel (if
any). The defendant also understands that defendant has the right to plead not guilty
or to persist in that plea if it has already been made, and that defendant has the right
to be tried by a jury with the assistance of counsel, the right to confront and cross-
examine the witnesses against defendant, the right against compulsory self-
incrimination, and the right compulsory process for the attendance of witnesses to

testify in defendant's defénse; but, by pleading guilty, defendant waives or gives up

Defendant’s Initials \ 18
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 19 of 43 PagelD 39

those rights and there will be no trial. The defendant further understands that if
defendant pleads guilty, the Court may ask defendant questions about the offense or
offenses to which defendant pleaded, and if defendant answers those questions under
oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel (if any), defendant's answers may
later be used against defendant in a prosecution for perjury or false statement. The
defendant also understands that defendant will be adjudicated guilty of the offenses to
which defendant has pleaded and, if any of such offenses are felonies, may thereby be
deprived of certain rights, such as the right to vote, to hold public office, to serve on a
jury, or to have possession of firearms.
11. Factual Basis

Defendant is pleading guilty because defendant is in fact guilty. The
defendant certifies that defendant does hereby admit that the facts set forth in the
attached "Factual Basis," which is incorporated herein by reference, are true, and were
this case to go to trial, the United States would be able to prove those specific facts and
others beyond a reasonable doubt.

12. Entire Agreement

This plea agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
government and the defendant with respect to the aforementioned guilty plea and no
other promises, agreements, or representations exist or have been made to the

defendant or defendant's attorney with regard to such guilty plea.

( 19

Defendant’s Initials
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 20 of 43 PagelD 40

13. Certification
The defendant and defendant's counsel certify that this plea agreement
has been read in its entirety by (or has been read to) the defendant and that defendant

fully understands its terms.

DATED this__/*" dayof___ Mla yy , 2023.

ROGER B. HANDBERG
United States Attorney

A,

Amanda S. Daniels
Assistant United States Attorney

/Mat e Y Chauncey A. Bratt
At for Defendant Assistant United States Attorney

Deputy Chief, Orlando Division

Defendant’s Initials \ 20
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 21 of 43 PagelD 41

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Vv. CASE NO. 6:23-cr-
NABIL DAJANI
PERSONALIZATION OF ELEMENTS

Count One - Conspiracy

First: Did you and at least one other person in some way agree to try to
accomplish a shared and unlawful plan?

Second: Did you know the unlawful purpose of the plan and willfully join
in it?

Third: During the conspiracy, did one of the conspirators knowingly
engage in at least one overt act as described in the Information?

Fourth: Was the overt act committed at or about the time alleged and with
the purpose of carrying out or accomplishing some object of the
conspiracy?

Count Two — Submission of a False Claim

First: Did you knowingly present a false claim against the United States
to an agency of the United States on or about August 5, 2020?

Second: Was the claim based on a false or fraudulent material fact?

Third: Did you act intentionally and know that the claim was false and
fraudulent?

Defendant’s Initials \ 21
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 22 of 43 PagelD 42

Count Three — Enticement of Another to Travel for Prostitution

First: Did you knowingly persuade or entice, or attempt to persuade or
entice, or aid and abet another in persuading or enticing, Victim-1
and Victim-2 to travel in interstate or foreign commerce?

Second: Was the purpose of the travel for Victim-1 and Victim-2 to engage
in prostitution?

Defendant’s Initials 22
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 23 of 43 PagelD 43

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. CASE NO. 6:23-cr- $5-GAP-F Tk
NABIL DAJANI

FACTUAL BASIS

Overview of EIDL Loan Process

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act. In conjunction
with an officially declared disaster by the United States Government, the CARES Act
allowed for the Small Business Administration, an agency of the United States, to offer
Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) funding to business owners negatively affected
by the COVID-19 pandemic. To qualify, a business had to be in operation prior to
February 1, 2020.

Using the SBA online portal, EIDL applicants submitted personal and business
information in support of each EIDL application, and they did not have to submit
supporting documentation of any sort. The application included a jurat-like paragraph
where the applicant affirms that the information submitted is true and correct under
the penalty of perjury and applicable criminal statutes.

The application process involved filling out assorted data fields relating to the
size of the affected business entity, the ownership of said business, and other

information such as the number of employees and gross business revenues realized in
Defendant’s Initials 2a

]
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 24 of 43 PagelD 44

the 12 months prior to the date of the disaster (January 31, 2020). This information
furnished by the applicant was then used by SBA application evaluation systems to
calculate the principal amount of money the small business was eligible to receive in
the form of an EIDL.

In addition to applying for an EIDL, an applicant could request and then receive
up to $10,000 in an EIDL Cash Advance Grant based on the number of employees
claimed. The EIDL Cash Advance Grant was disbursed in amounts of $1,000 per
claimed employee. Any EIDL Cash Advance Grant funding that was received by an
applicant based on the number of claimed employees did not need to be repaid to the
SBA if the loan application was ultimately denied by the SBA, or if the applicant
declined the EIDL that was offered by the SBA at a later date.

Pursuant to the provisions governing the EIDL program, loan proceeds had to
be used by that business on certain permissible expenses. The EIDL (working capital)
loans had to be used by the afflicted business to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts
payable, and other bills that could have been paid had the COVID-19 disaster not
occurred.

To evaluate EIDL applications, the SBA computer system used automation and
system programming to quickly conduct checks of each application submitted by each
applicant. The SBA computer system performed checks of the applicant’s credit
worthiness and evaluated other elements of data furnished by the applicant to identify
duplicative applications and indicators of fraudulent activity. The SBA computer

system also utilized the information furnished by the applicant to determine the dollar

Defendant’s Initials \ 24
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 25 of 43 PagelD 45

amount of the loan offer that the applicant may be extended, which included gross
revenues in the 12-month period prior to the disaster, costs of goods sold during that
same timespan, and loss of rental income. If any aspect of the application did not pass
the automated evaluation within the SBA computer system, the application’s progress
was stopped, and an electronic notification was sent to the applicant regarding the
potential cause for the application to be halted. The applicant was then given the
opportunity to engage with the SBA and request reconsideration of the application.
The loan application evaluation system also was designed so that SBA employees, to
include SBA Loan Specialists, could affect applications and manually change and
override the system’s actions if appropriate and necessary.

Overview of the SBA Conspirator

NABIL DAJANI conspired with an SBA employee (referred to herein as the
“SBA Conspirator”) and Joel Micah Greenberg to submit false applications for EIDL
loans and to pay the SBA Conspirator bribes and kickbacks with the intent to influence
the SBA Conspirator to allow and make an opportunity for the commission of a fraud
on the United States through the preparation and submission of fraudulent EIDL
applications to the SBA.

The “SBA Conspirator” was a resident of the Middle District of Florida and a
“public official” as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 201(a)(1). In or about May 2020, the SBA
Conspirator began working for the U.S. Government as an SBA Loan Specialist. As

an SBA Loan Specialist, the SBA Conspirator was responsible for processing home

and business loans; making recommendations on collateral needed to secure loans;

Y

Defendant’s Initials \ 20
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 26 of 43 PagelD 46

applying accepted financial procedures to analyze financial resources to determine an
applicant's ability to repay requested loans; reviewing all pertinent facts needed to
make eligibility determinations by analyzing such factors as the nature and cause of
damage, intended use of proceeds, legislative and administrative loan limits, and
disposition of insurance and other recoveries; ensuring loan files contain all pertinent
documentation, to include conversations with applicants and written
recommendations or justifications for conclusions; processing loan applications on
web-based computer system; and responding orally and in writing to applicants or
their representatives. Because of COVID-19, the SBA authorized the SBA
Conspirator to work from her residence located in the Middle District of Florida.

For the EIDLs discussed in this plea agreement, the SBA did not assign the SBA
Conspirator to work on any of them, and the SBA Conspirator never notified the SBA
that she was involved in any aspect of handling those loans. The SBA Conspirator
was not authorized to use the SBA computer system for any of the loans referenced in
this plea agreement.

DAJANI’s Fraudulent EIDL Application for Perfect Golf Grip

According to records maintained by the Florida Department of State, DAJANI
is a managing member of the Perfect Golf Grip, LLC. On or about April 14, 2015,
Articles of Organization were filed for the Perfect Golf Grip. On or about September
27, 2016, DAJANI filed a reinstatement of the company in which he was identified as

the registered agent. On/or about June 26, 2017, DAJANI submitted Articles of

Amendment to Articles of Organization in which he was identified as an authorized

Defendant’s Initials \t 26
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 27 of 43 PagelD 47

member. In annual reports submitted for 2019 and 2020, DAJANT is identified as an
authorized member and Vice President.

In or about June 2020, DAJANI was referred by another individual to the SBA
Conspirator for the purpose of applying for an EIDL. On or about June 19, 2020,
DAJANI contacted the SBA Conspirator about submitting an EIDL for the Perfect
Golf Grip. On or about that same day (June 19, 2020), in the Middle District of
Florida, the SBA Conspirator submitted an EIDL application for the Perfect Golf Grip
on DAJANI’s behalf. In that loan application, it was represented that the Perfect Golf
Grip earned $1,728,963 in gross revenue in the 12-month period prior to the COVID-
19 Pandemic (from February 2019 to January 2020), that the cost of doing business in
the same period was identified as $1,237, that the business’s rental property income
losses were $23,568, and that it had 12 employees. DAJANI was identified as the sole
owner of the company, and the bank account where funds were to be deposited was
one for which DAJANI was the sole signatory.

As DAJANI knew when the application was submitted, those representations
were false and fraudulent. The Perfect Golf Grip did not earn the revenues set out on
the application, and it did not have 12 employees. Bank records for two accounts of
the Perfect Golf Grip during the pertinent time period of February 2019 to January
2020 establish that the revenues in DAJANI’s application for The Perfect Golf Grip

were inflated (cumulative amounts reflected for time period of February 2019 to

January 2020): /

\
Defendant’s Initials 27
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 28 of 43 PagelD 48

Bank Deposits Withdrawals | Ending Balance
as of 1/31/2020

Valley $39,167.55 $33,681.52 $5,486.03

National Bank

Iberia $3,540.42 $4,393.98 Account closed

In fact, the deposits made into those two accounts did not always reflect earnings by
the Perfect Golf Grip, but sometimes consisted of transfers of funds from DAJANI’s
other accounts or amounts earned from his mortgage business.

The SBA did not initially approve DAJANI’s application for the Perfect Golf
Grip. On or about June 20, 2020, the SBA sent DAJANI a letter advising that his
application was denied due to his “unsatisfactory credit history.” In a text message
on or about June 20, 2020, DAJANI asked the SBA Conspirator to use her access to
the SBA system to determine whether DAJANI’s credit score was above the minimum
requirement; the SBA Employee advised that it was not.

This began a series of regular texts, totaling over 20, between DAJANI and the
SBA Conspirator where DAJANI and the SBA Conspirator discussed DAJANI’s poor
credit and the SBA Conspirator’s attempts to use her access to the SBA System to assist
DAJANT in his efforts to obtain an EIDL loan for the Perfect Golf Grip. The following

are some of those text messages:

Date Text

6/21/2020 SBA Conspirator advises DAJANI that she
can use the SBA system to “refresh internally
to make sure the score comes up”

6/22/2020 SBA Conspirator states, “I will refresh [the
SBA system] and keep a lookout”
6/25/2020 SBA Conspirator states, “Your score is up []

Defendant’s Initials \ | 28
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 29 of 43 PagelD 49

6/25/2020 DAJANI states, “Not enough to render
approval for this loan,” and SBA Conspirator
replies, “Working on it”

7/13/2020 DAJANI states, “Morning [SBA
Conspirator], thanks for checking up on my
credit report again — if that was u” and SBA
Conspirator responding, “Yes, it was me and
I am keeping up on it!”

7/17/2020 SBA Conspirator states, “I'll pull it
[DAJANI’s credit report] on Monday”

As he was waiting for his EIDL for the Perfect Golf Grip to process, DAJANI
referred other loan applicants to the SBA Conspirator. DAJANI collected “consulting
fees” for the SBA Conspirator and referred others to the SBA Conspirator. The text
messages establish that one of DAJANI’s motives was to encourage the SBA
Conspirator to continue to “fix” the problems with DAJANI’s loan application for the
Perfect Golf Grip, which were caused by DAJANT’s poor credit, by offering to assist
her in obtaining additional referrals and payments for using her position to submit
fraudulent EIDLs. Some of DAJANI’s text messages related to his role as a facilitator

of fraudulent loans include:

Date DAJANI Text

6/22/2020 | Both Greenberg and [another individual referred

by DAJANIT] have been advised that u also have

business is assisting them. They understand

6/25/2020 | For ur consulting business suppose some work is

done and suppose a client applies for a loan and is

successful, what would you say is a good

consulting fee? I’m collecting now make sure it’s

paid lol

6/25/2020 | I said $1000. Good? Need address and to who

made

6/25/2020 |I Wave my [relative of DAJANI] wants it now.
hone if cake deal. Good scores has car dealership

Defendant’s Initials \ 29
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 30 of 43 PagelD 50

6/25/2020 | Make it [DAJANT’s loan for the Perfect Golf Grip]
happen and you get 1k [another individual referred
by DAJANI] 1k Greenberg 1k [another individual
referred by DAJANI] (new one and easy) and 3K
me

6/26/2020 |I gave ur email address to a friend [another
individual referred by DAJANI] who’ll be
emailing u.

6/27/2020 | Good moming [another individual referred by
DAJANI] and another close friend will loan me
@12K to payoff 2 cards maxed out that’ll boost my
score if paid off. If ur able to get it done for
[another individual referred by DAJAN]] or if you
tell him he’s good after ur 10am call then they’re
loaning me the $

6/29/2020 | Ohand PLEASE LET ME KNOW when [another
individual referred by DAJANI] gets funded bc
he’s helping me payoff 2 other cards.

7/1/2020 Remember I told you I look out for you make sure
ur work doesn’t go unrewarded. Anyone who
doesn’t see the privilege shouldn’t receive the same
attention back so any referrals from [another
individual who referred people for loans to the SBA
Conspirator] I’d leave on the back burmer for now.
Just sayin

7/1/2020 Just spoke to my [relative of DAJANI] he’s
sending you 2k I’ll give him your address
7/2/2020 Morning. Going to see [another individual
referred by DAJANIT] make sure he mails you. He
assured me and I trust him that he and whoever
else he referred mail u as well. Checking with
[another individual referred by DAJANI] now
she’s sending 1000

7/2/2020 Expect [another individual referred by DAJANT]
any day then if not today. Notice how I negotiated
double ur expectation for u. Told everyone if you
want favor pulled don’t even consider being cheap
7/2/202 My [relative of DAJANIT] is clear and very happy
to pay invoice and also instructed Amounts
7/4/2020 Hey for [another individual referred by DAJANIT]
do you want her to pay by card now?

Defendant’s Taietals 30
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 31 of 43 PagelD 51

7/16/2020 | In response to a text from the SBA Conspirator
complaining that [another individual referred by
DAJANI] was a “deadbeat,” DAJANI
volunteered to help her with collections: “Gimme
the names.”

DAJANT’s efforts eventually paid off. On or about July 19, 2020, at 8:04 p.m.,
the SBA Conspirator, who was not assigned to this loan application in any official
capacity, accessed the Perfect Golf Grip’s EIDL application and changed its status to
“Credit Pulled.” As a result, the SBA system approved the EIDL loan for the Perfect
Golf Grip.

On or about July 19, 2020, DAJANI accepted the terms of the EIDL loan by
executing a Loan Authorization and Agreement, which set out several requirements.
It provided that “Borrower will use all the proceeds of this Loan solely as working
capital to alleviate economic injury caused by disaster occurring in the month of
January 31, 2020 and continuing thereafter” and that “[t]here has been no substantial
adverse change in Borrower's financial condition (and organization, in case of a
business borrower) since the date of the application for this Loan. (Adverse changes
include, but are not limited to: judgment liens, tax liens, mechanic's liens, bankruptcy,
financial reverses, arrest or conviction of felony, etc.).” By his signature, DAJANI
represented that “[a]ll representations in the Borrower's Loan application (including
all supplementary submissions) are true, correct and complete and are offered to
induce SBA to make this Loan” and that “Borrower certifies that no fees have been
paid, directly or indirectly, 0 any representative (attorney, accountant, etc.) for

services provided or tq be provided in connection with applying for or closing this

Defendant’s Initials \ 31
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 32 of 43 PagelD 52

Loan, other than those reported on the Loan Application.” The Loan Authorization
and Agreement specifically advised DAJANI of the penalties associated with making
false statements, including fines and imprisonment pursuant to “15 U.S.C. 645, 18
U.S.C. 1001, 18 U.S.C. 1014, 18 U.S.C. 1040, 18 U.S.C. 3571, and any other
applicable laws.”

As DAJANI knew when he executed the Agreement, he was engaged in fraud
and was not going to use the funds “as working capital to alleviate economic injury”
caused by COVID-19. Before receiving the EIDL funds, the Perfect Golf Grip’s bank
account had a balance of only $146.25. After receiving the credit from the SBA in the
amount of $149,900 for the fraudulent EIDL for the Perfect Golf Grip, DAJANI
transferred $23,000 of those funds to his personal checking account at Valley Bank,
account number ****7030. There were no other credits to the Perfect Golf Grip bank
account following the credit from the SBA loan (except for one credit of $1.57), which
is consistent with a non-operational business. Further disbursements from the account
consisted primarily of personal expenses for DAJANI, including payments to
American Express, debit card purchases, ATM withdrawals, and miscellaneous
checks cashed. The balance in the account as of September 30, 2020, was $71,503.78.
On or about November 6, 2020, the United States seized $69,239.62 pursuant to a
federal seizure warrant. DAJANI agrees and acknowledges that those funds were the
proceeds of the conspiracy.

DAJANI also committed fraud by failing to identify his payment to the SBA

Conspirator. As noted aye, DAJANI falsely certified that “Borrower certifies that

Defendant’s Initials | 32
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 33 of 43 PagelD 53

no fees have been paid, directly or indirectly, to any representative (attorney,
accountant, etc.) for services provided or to be provided in connection with applying
for or closing this Loan, other than those reported on the Loan Application.” In fact,
DAJANI paid the SBA Conspirator $1,000 to a Cash App account controlled by the
SBA Conspirator on or about July 22, 2020, which funds were those that DAJANI
had promised repeatedly to pay the SBA Conspirator with the intent to influence the
SBA Conspirator to allow and make an opportunity for the commission of a fraud on
the United States through the preparation and submission of a fraudulent EIDL
application to the SBA for the Perfect Golf Grip.

DAJANI’s Assistance for Greenberg

DAJAN is a friend of Greenberg. On the same day that the SBA Conspirator
submitted a false loan for the Perfect Golf Grip, DAJANI told Greenberg about the
SBA Conspirator and the scheme to submit false EIDL applications.

On or about June 19, 2020, DAJANI texted Greenberg that he had an “easy”
and “quick” way for Greenberg to get a loan for “up to $160K.” DAJANI advised
Greenberg to contact the SBA Conspirator.

On or about June 19, 2020, Greenberg texted the SBA Conspirator that he was
referred by DAJANI “for assistance with a loan application.” Greenberg and the SBA
Conspirator talked that day. In connection with that conversation, Greenberg sent the
SBA Conspirator a portion of his 2018 personal tax return. The SBA Conspirator
advised, “We can use this to file . . . you should be able to apply for 150k.” The SBA

Conspirator requested thatGreénberg send information for the loan, including his date

Defendant’s Initials 33
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 34 of 43 PagelD 54

of birth, place of birth, and bank account information. The SBA Conspirator prepared
the loan application and advised Greenberg to forward her the email that he would
receive. The SBA Conspirator advised that she would be able to “look into the [SBA]
system and upload{] your document from there” and advise him about the “timeframe
on it’s competition.” Six hours later, the SBA Conspirator told Greenberg that the
application was “accepted” and that she would advise him about the “underwriting
timeframe [o]ver the next week.” The SBA Conspirator texted Greenberg a
photograph of her SBA computer that displayed the approved application as shown
on the SBA system.

The application prepared and submitted by the SBA Conspirator was
fraudulent. As had been done with DAJANI’s fraudulent application for the Perfect
Golf Grip, the revenues of the business, the cost of goods sold, and lost rental incomes
were fabricated and inflated to induce the SBA into providing a large loan (of
$133,000) to Greenberg.

As Greenberg knew at the time, the SBA Conspirator was using her access to
the SBA system to ensure that he got a loan that was based on false representations.
The SBA Conspirator texted Greenberg a screen shot from the SBA system of some of
the information for his loan application, which included a claim that Greenberg earned
$13,461 in monthly sales, which Greenberg knew was not true.

On or about June 21, 2020, Greenberg texted DAJANI the screen shot that the
SBA Conspirator had texted about Greenberg’s EIDL application. The screen shot

was of a computer screen from the SBA computer system that included the SBA

Defendant’s Initials _\_, 34
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 35 of 43 PagelD 55

Conspirator’s name and title (“SBA Loan Officer’). Greenberg asked DAJANI:
“What does this mean?” and “So what does she [the SBA Conspirator] make out of
this? What’s her compensation, I’m confused.”

DAJANI texted Greenberg that the SBA Conspirator worked for the SBA and
that she processes loans for him “privately” if he asked “her to as a favor” and that
“Gt’s an SBA loan no one knows about.” DAJANI explained that Greenberg needed
to pay the SBA Conspirator for her assistance (“so just cut her a check for whatever
you get funded”), Greenberg acknowledged this. DAJANI knew that Greenberg had
no intention of using the funds for any type of legitimate business.

DAJANI texted the SBA Conspirator to continue to facilitate the fraudulent
EIDL to Greenberg and to obtain additional loans for Greenberg. DAJANI also
served as the conduit for the payments that were to be made by Greenberg to the SBA
Conspirator for assisting with the fraudulent EIDL application. The following are
some of the over 20 texts that DAJANI sent to the SBA Conspirator to facilitate the
submission of false applications for Greenberg and to arrange for payments by

Greenberg to the SBA Conspirator:

Date DAJANI Text
6/19/2020 | My good friend Greenberg is texting u shortly for
an application. He’s a perfect applicant for this
6/21/2020 | I’mso envious of Greenberg lol [after learning that
Other Conspirator’s application was approved]
6/22/2020 | Both Greenberg and [another individual referred
by DAJANT] have been advised that u also have a
consulting business and that that business is
assisting them. They understand

Defendant’s Initials 35
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 36 of 43 PagelD 56

6/25/2020 | Make it [approval of the Perfect Golf Grip’s EIDL
loan] happen and you get 1k [another individual
referred by DAJANI] 1k Greenberg 1k [another
individual referred by DAJANI] (new one and easy
and 3k me

6/27/2020 | Anyway can you set up another call with
Greenberg for another round off his other entities?
He’s going to owe you 2k

6/28/2020 | DAJANI identifies referrals to date as including
Greenberg and another individual, and that
Greenberg was “looking for another one. He has
several entities”

6/29/2020 | Please let me know if you spoke to Greenberg
about more and how much you think is possible.
7/1/2020 Following up to our discussion yesterday.
Greenberg: the 2 additional loans how much is
each for? AND: I talked to him yesterday, besides
his wife does he qualify for 1 or 2 more? Those are
good too if available. [another individual referred
by DAJANI]: status if you have one. I’m making
sure us totally good on every deal in every way
7/1/2020 In response to a text from the SBA Conspirator
complaining that “we have not received any of the
checks as of today,” DAJANI texted the SBA
Conspirator: “another individual referred by
DAJANT] too? I know [another individual referred
by DAJANIT] and Greenberg [another individual
referred by DAJANI] are for sure. Those are the
ones funded I send thus far.”

If Greenberg is a certainty for the other 2 ll have
him mail 3k now. 1k per

7/1/2020 For sure. Don’t worry all are good. If Greenberg
is good on the other 2 I’ll have him send you 3k
immediately. If you have an idea when he’s getting
funded please let me know

7/2/2020 If you happen to know a status on Greenberg 2 new
ones please let me know

7/2/2020 Greenberg 1k for first 2k for other 2 for 3k total
comm

Defendant’s Initials 36
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 37 of 43 PagelD 57

7/2/2020 If you have any status on Greenberg please advise

7/2/2020 Apologies for late text just wondering if Greenberg
situation is easy fix or not.

7/2/202 I have my bro in law getting you voided check first
thing to small u. Lmk if you need anything like
that on Greenberg and Ill get it.

7/13/2020 | And you know when Greenberg might be funded?

7/22/2020 | Good morning superstar. Greenberg (2( and I all
funded

Working with the SBA Conspirator and DAJANI, Greenberg successfully
obtained three fraudulent EIDLs, totaling approximately $433,000 in principal plus an
additional $2,000 in advances for non-existent employees. As noted above, the first
EIDL application for Greenberg was in his name for a business that did not exist. The
other two EIDL applications were made using the names of companies that used to
belong to Greenberg, but that were inactive, had no revenues, and had been
administratively dissolved.

The SBA deposited the funds for the three loans for Greenberg into bank
accounts controlled by him. As was the plan from the inception of the conspiracy,
Greenberg shared some of the proceeds that he obtained from the fraud scheme with
his conspirators. Greenberg gave DAJANI $16,000, consisting of a $6,000 check
dated June 27, 2020, with a memo line for “loan,” a $5,000 check dated July 26, 2020,
with a memo line of “Fee July,” and a $5,000 check dated July 26, 2020, with a memo
line of “Fee August.” These checks represent Greenberg sharing some of the proceeds
with the person who brought him into the conspiracy (DAJAND), with the three checks
corresponding with when Greenberg obtained funds from his fraudulent SBA EIDLs.

The notations on the checks were efforts to conceal the true purpose of the payments.

Defendant’s Initials | / 37
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 38 of 43 PagelD 58

Greenberg did the same with the SBA Conspirator, by sending her $3,000 on or
about July 16, 2020, using Cash App. Greenberg sent these funds as part of his
agreement with DAJANI and the SBA Conspirator to influence an official act of the
SBA Conspirator related to the submission and approval of Greenberg’s three loans
and to influence the SBA Conspirator to allow or make an opportunity for the
commission of a fraud on the United States.

DAJANI’s Fraudulent EIDL Application for Community Cultural

DAJANI filed another fraudulent EIDL application for Community Cultural
Consulting LLC, which he created in December 2018. His only client was the
Seminole County Tax Collector’s Office. Greenberg, using funds from the Seminole
County Tax Collector’s Office, paid Community Cultural Consulting approximately
$16,000 by credit card in 2019. The bank records do not reflect any deposits from any
other entities related to consulting work. DAJANI never filed an annual report, and
Community Cultural Consulting was administratively dissolved on September 25,
2020.

Prior to that, DAJANI used his dormant company to obtain another EIDL. On
or about August 1, 2020, DAJANI texted the SBA Conspirator: “Hi! Open for
business? I can’t believe I forgot about my other business - ACTIVE! Are you free to
try to get me qualified.”

The SBA Conspirator agreed to assist DAJANI on another fraudulent EIDL.
The text messages reflect multiple indicators of fraud. DAJANI advised that he did

not have an Employer Identification Number for the business and that he did not have

Defendant’s Initials 38
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 39 of 43 PagelD 59

information for his bank account. In fact, DAJANI did not open the bank account for
Community Cultural Consulting for another two days.

The application for Community Cultural Consulting was false and fraudulent.
It was submitted by another individual acting at the SBA Conspirator’s direction and
on behalf of DAJANI on or about August 4, 2020, at 9:40 p.m. in the Middle District
of Florida. The application represented that the business realized gross revenue of
$305,667 in the 12-month period prior to COVID-19 and that the business had no costs
of doing business and no rental properties income losses (yielding a 100% profit
margin). The contact email submitted for DAJANI within the application was
identified as a Gmail account that belonged to DAJANI. The destination financial
account for any SBA funds was listed as Valley National Bank account #****3603,
which was the account that DAJANI controlled and set up on or about August 3,
2020.

As DAJANI knew when those representations were made, they were false and
fraudulent. Community Cultural Consulting had done no work for most of 2019 or at
any point in 2020, and it was not an active business. It had no operations, revenues,
or employees. The only consulting fees received by the business were the
approximately $16,000 that was received in 2019 from the entity where Greenberg
worked.

In reliance upon the false representations made in the EIDL application of
Community Cultural Consulting, the SBA approved the fraudulent application. On

or about August 5, 2020 DAJANI executed a Loan Authorization and Agreement

Defendant’s Initials ] 39
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 40 of 43 PagelD 60

that contained the same terms as the Agreement that he executed for the Perfect Golf
Grip. In that Agreement, DAJANI falsely certified that Community Cultural
Consulting had suffered economic injury in the month of January 2020 and continuing
thereafter, that the revenue amounts set out in the EIDL application were true and
correct, that the information in the EIDL application was true, correct, and complete,
and that no fees were to be provided in connection with the EIDL. As DAJANI knew,
Community Cultural Consulting was a defunct business that had not suffered any
economic injury, and he had no intention of using any EIDL funds as “working capital
to alleviate economic injury caused by” COVID-19.

On or about August 7, 2020, the SBA credited Community Cultural
Consulting’s account at Valley National in the amount of $149,900. Prior to that, the
balance in the account was only $250. Following the credit from the SBA loan,
DAJANI transferred $41,000 to his personal checking account at Valley Bank, account
number ****7030. Except for the initial $250 deposit that was made to open the
account, there were no other deposits or withdrawals from the account. On or about
November 6, 2020, the United States seized $88,371.80 ($85,150.00 from Valley
National Bank account number ****3603 held in the name of Community Cultural
Consulting, LLC, and $3,221.80 from Valley National Bank account number
****7030 held in the name of Nabil Dajani) pursuant to a federal seizure warrant.
DAJANI agrees and acknowledges that those funds were the proceeds of the

conspiracy.

Defendant’s Initials : 40
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 41 of 43 PagelD 61

DAJANI did not use any of the funds in his personal account at Valley
National, account number ****7030, for any business expenses of Community
Cultural Consulting. Between July 22, 2020, and September 24, 2020, there were nine
transfers of funds from the Perfect Golf Grip LLC and Community Cultural
Consulting LLC to DAJANI’s personal bank account ****7030, totaling $64,000. The
only other earnings reflected in DAJANI’s personal account between July 22, 2020,
and September 24, 2020 was for his payroll from the mortgage company where he
works. In other words, the proceeds from the two SBA loans to the Perfect Golf Grip
and Community Cultural Consulting were commingled in this account with
DAJANI's payroll and other funds. The proceeds were used to pay DAJANI's
personal expenses, including payments to American Express, Capital One, debit card
purchases, PayPal Instant Transfers, loan payments and ATM withdrawals. None of
the funds from the two EIDLs were used in accordance with the intended purpose of
the loans.

As he had done after receiving the EIDL for the Perfect Golf Grip, DAJANI
paid the SBA Conspirator upon successful receipt of the loan proceeds for Community
Cultural Consulting. On or about September 21, 2020, DAJANI paid the SBA
Conspirator $1,300 to a Cash App account controlled by the SBA Conspirator, which
funds were those that DAJANI had promised to pay the SBA Conspirator with the
intent to influence the SBA Conspirator to allow and make an opportunity for the
commission of a fraud on the United States through the preparation and submission

of a fraudulent EIDL application to the SBA for Community Cultural Consulting.
\

Defendant’s Initials 4]
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 42 of 43 PagelD 62

The parties agree and acknowledge that the amount of loss in this case for
purpose of the federal sentencing guidelines is more than $550,000 and less than $1.5
million, including the loss of approximately $435,000 associated with the loans and
advances for Greenberg and the loss of approximately $300,000 for DAJANT’s loans.
The parties further agree that DAJANI personally received a total of $315,800 in
proceeds obtained as a result of the conspiracy. Of that $315,800, the United States
has recovered and administratively forfeited $157,611.42.

Enticement of Victim-1 and Victim-2 to Engage in Prostitution

Between September 2016 and October 2016, while in the Middle District of

Florida, DAJANI aided and abetted another individual (“Co-conspirator 1”) in

beth of whom weve Concentra adu\h
persuading, inducing, and enticing Victim-1 and Victim-2, to travel in interstate
commerce, specifically between North Carolina and the Middle District of Florida, to
engage in prostitution.

Prior to their travel to the Middle District of Florida, Victim-1 and Victim-2
were known to DAJANI and Co-conspirator 1 as persons who lived in North Carolina
and who engaged in prostitution. In September 2016, Co-conspirator 1 contacted.
Victim-1 using the internet and offered to pay Victim-1 to travel to Florida to “party,”
which Victim-1 and Co-conspirator 1 understood to mean to engage in sexual
activities. Co-conspirator 1 further communicated on behalf of his friend, DAJANI,
that DAJANI wished to pay someone to “party,” i.e. engage in sexual activities, as
well. Victim-1 thus recruited a friend, Victim-2, to travel to the Middle District of

Florida for this purpose. ;

Defendant’s Initials 42
Case 6:23-cr-00085-GAP-EJK Document 3 Filed 05/01/23 Page 43 of 43 PagelD 63

In early October 2016, Victim-1 and Victim-2 traveled from North Carolina to
the Middle District of Florida and were paid by Co-conspirator 1 and DAJANI to do
so. After Victim-1 and Victim-2 arrived in the Middle District of Florida, Co-
conspirator 1 and DAJANI arranged for Victim-1 and Victim-2 to stay at a hotel in
the Middle District of Florida. After Victim-1 and Victim-2 arrived at the hotel, Co-

conspirator 1 and DAJANI engaged in sexual activities with Victim-1 and Victim-2.

Defendant’s Initials 43


File and source

File

3.pdf

Size

19,987,333 bytes

SHA-256

a6fb0840da53a15c690f93d3d205e990f82826bfe35187237e7ef0733aa3fdc8

Our copy

3.pdf

Original

archive.org