Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Factual Proffer — U.S. v. Leiner Pena Infante (S.D. Fla.)Search ⌕

Factual Proffer — U.S. v. Leiner Pena Infante (S.D. Fla.)

Summary

A factual proffer in United States of America v. Leiner Pena Infante, Case No. 22-80118-CR-MIDDLEBROOKS/MATTHEWMAN, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the docket November 18, 2022 as Document 122. It states that a PPP application for Penas Concrete Pumping Corp. was submitted to Kabbage, Inc. claiming 84 employees and average monthly payroll of $288,344, when the company had only one employee. It states that Kabbage transferred $720,860 on or about July 1, 2020, and that the defendant gave co-defendant Yunior Barrera Almaguer blank pre-signed checks and wrote checks at that co-defendant's direction. It gives checks of $22,000 and $8,000 to EBO Construction as examples of laundering. The proffer is dated 11-14-2022.

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

Cite this document

“Factual Proffer — U.S. v. Leiner Pena Infante (S.D. Fla.).” Original at ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-usa-v-barrera-almaguer-et-al-dkt-122-s-d-fla-3c8e646f85/, SHA-256 0249f3f5be182a630a6d5286a082cee5852af82b46bb832f95cc9831227c54e1.

Full text

Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/18/2022 Page 1 of 4




                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                  Case No. 22-80118-CR-MIDDLEBROOKS/MA TTHEWMAN



     UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

     V.                                                              NOV 17 2022
                                                                     ANGELA E. NOBLE
     LEINER PENA INFANTE,                                           CLERK U.S. DIST. CT.
                                                                    S.D. OF FLA. - W.P.B.
          Defendant.

                                      FACTUAL PROFFER

           If this matter had gone to trial , the United States would have proven the following

    facts beyond a reasonable doubt, which occurred in the Southern District of Florida and

    elsewhere:

          The Coronavirus Aid , Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was a

    federal law enacted in or around March 2020 , designed to provide emergency

    financial assistance to Americans who were suffering the economic effects caused

    by the COVID-19 pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was a

    program referred to as the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) , which authorized

    forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses.

           In order to obtain a PPP loan , a qualifying business submitted a PPP loan

    application , which was signed by an authorized representative of the business . The

    PPP loan application required the business to acknowledge the program rules and

    make certain affirmative certifications in order to be eligible to obtain the loan. In the

    PPP loan application , the small business was required to provide, among other things ,
•Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/18/2022 Page 2 of 4




    its average monthly payroll expenses and number of employees, which were used to

    calculate the amount of money the small business was eligible to receive .

          A PPP loan application was processed by a participating lender. If a PPP loan

    application was approved , the participating lender funded the PPP loan using its own

    monies , and the loan was 100% guaranteed by the SBA.         PPP loan proceeds were

    required to be used by the business to pay expenses necessary to continue the

    operations of the business , including the payroll costs of employees , interest on

    mortgages , rent, and utilities. The interest and principal on the PPP loan could be

    entirely forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on these expense items within a

    designated period of time and used a defined portion of the loan proceeds on payroll

    expenses.

          On or about June 27 , 2020 , LEINER PENA INFANTE (PENA) allowed the

    submission of a PPP loan application on behalf of his company , Penas Concrete

    Pumping Corp . (Penas Concrete) to lender Kabbage , Inc.       Specifically, PENA gave

    his name, social security number, date of birth , mailing address , and email address ,

    and the bank account routing number for Penas Concrete to co-defendant Yunior

    BARRERA ALMAGUER (BARRERA) , who then had an unindicted co-conspirator

    use interstate wire communications to electronically view and sign a PPP Loan

    Application Form on behalf of Penas Concrete , which falsely represented that the

    company had 84 employees and an average monthly payroll of $288 ,344 each

    month . In actuality, Penas Concrete had only one employee , PENA.

          On or about July 1, 2020 , based on the false information provided in the loan


                                               2
Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/18/2022 Page 3 of 4




    application , Kabbage approved the loan and transferred $720 ,860 in PPP funds via

    interstate wire communication to Penas Concrete's account at Bank of America

    (BofA) , for which PENA was the only signatory.    Bank records showed that Penas

    Concrete's bank account at BofA had a balance of approximately $3 ,200 immediately

    prior to receipt of the PPP funds , and that there was no evidence of payroll payments

    to employees for Penas Concrete.

          BARRERA instructed PENA to give him blank, pre-signed checks drawn on

    the BofA account so that BARRERA could access the PPP funds, which PENA did .

    PENA also wrote checks on the account at BARRERA's direction.        Throughout July

    2020 , PENA was aware that BARRERA laundered the PPP funds , by either writing

    checks (or directing PENA to write checks) to entities or individuals who were not

    associated with Penas Concrete , or by making large cash withdrawals.             For

    example, on October 7 , 2020 , BARRERA directed PENA to write checks in the

    amounts of $22 ,000 and $8 ,000 respectively from Penas Concrete's BofA account

    using monies from the PPP loan as described above, to EBO Construction , which

    had also received its own PPP loan in the same scheme with BARRERA, and which

    was controlled by BARRERA.        After receiving these checks, EBO Construction

    deposited them in Miami-Dade County into its Wells Fargo account, followed by which

    EBO Construction wrote checks sending the funds to BARRERA's company, YBA

    Auto. PENA also received a portion of the unlawfully obtained PPP funds from

    BARRERA as payment for his role in the money laundering.

          At all times relevant to the offense conduct , Bank of America and Wells Fargo


                                              3
Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/18/2022 Page 4 of 4




    were banks the deposits of which were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance

    Corporation , and wh ich were engaged in , and the activities of which affected ,

    interstate and foreign commerce.

              The parties agree that these facts , which do not include all facts known to the

    United States and PENA, are sufficient to prove the offense to which PENA is pleading

    guilty.

                                                  Respectfully submitted ,

                                                  JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ
                                                  UNITED STATES ATTORNEY


    Date : 11-14-2022                     By: ~             U
                                                  SUSAN OSBORN E    ---
                                                  ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY


    Date : /( - I 7-2Z                    By:      c::1✓~
                                                  AN □RMSMALLMAN        =--
                                                  A TTO RN EY FOR DEFENDANT


    Date :     / I-   I r- - 1-. ""l...
                                          By              ~
                                                  LEINER f>ENINFANTE
                                                  DEFENDANT




                                                    4


File and source

File
122-factual-proffer-as-to-leiner-pena-infante.pdf
Size
99,306 bytes
SHA-256
0249f3f5be182a630a6d5286a082cee5852af82b46bb832f95cc9831227c54e1
Our copy
122-factual-proffer-as-to-leiner-pena-infante.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top