Indictment — United States v. James A. Nolte, Northern District of West Virginia (Document 1)

Summary

An indictment filed December 6, 2022 as Document 1 in United States v. James A. Nolte, Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, charging wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. §1343 and unlawful monetary transactions under 18 U.S.C. §1957. The grand jury charges that from about May 2020 to about May 2021 the defendant submitted PPP applications with false employee and payroll figures and fraudulent tax documents for PGO Veteran Services, PG Health, RJS Catering and Dental Care Plus, including a $100,922.00 award for PGO Veteran Services. It states the United States was defrauded out of a total of $645,717.00. Counts One through Five charge wire fraud over the application transmissions, and Counts Six through Sixteen charge transactions such as a $135,901.44 cashier's check. Forfeiture of at least $645,717.00 is sought.

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

“Indictment — United States v. James A. Nolte, Northern District of West Virginia (Document 1).” Original at archive.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/indictment-no-1-22-cr-00081-dkt-1-n-d-w-va-efd48e6463/, SHA-256 04cb53c769b02285d90dc9a3a99ecb15f626bc1fd1af756bad7c6666425e6731.

Full text

Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
FILED
DEC 6 2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. CT COURT WVN

Criminal No.
v. 1:22-CR
Violations:
18 U.S.C. §1343
JAMES A. NOLTE, 18 U.S.C. §1957
Defendant.

INDICTMENT

The Grand Jury charges that:

INTRODUCTION

At all times relevant to this Indictment:

The COVID-19 Pandemic and the CARES Act

1. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a federal law

enacted on or about March 2020, designed to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions who

were suffering the economic effects caused by the C OVID- 19 pandemic.

2. Among other relief efforts, the United States sought to provide financial support to

eligible businesses that could be used to offset certain business expenses.

3. The Small Business Association (“SBA”) is an executive branch agency of the United

States government that provides support to entrepreneurs and small businesses. The SBA is

headquartered in Washington, D.C. and maintains its computer servers outside of the State of West

Virginia. The SBA’s mission was to maintain and strengthen the nation’s economy by enabling the

establishment and viability of small businesses and by assisting in the economic recovery of communities

1
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 2

after disasters.

4. As part of this effort, the SBA enabled and provided for loans through banks, credit

unions, and other lenders. These loans have government-backed guarantees.

The Paycheck Protection Program

5. One of the loans created was the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loan. This

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

6. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business had 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 requirement is that the business had to

be in operation as of February 15, 2020. In the PPP loan application, the small business (through its

authorized representative) had to state, among other things, its average monthly payroll expenses and

number of employees. These figures were then used to calculate the amount of money the small business

was eligible to receive under the PPP. In addition, a business applying for a PPP loan had to provide

documentation showing its payroll expenses.

7. A PPP loan application must be processed by a participating lender, such as a financial

institution. If a PPP loan is approved, the participating lender funds the PPP loan using its own monies,

which are 100% guaranteed by the SBA. Data from the application, including the information about the

borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of employees, is transmitted by the lender

to the SBA in the course of processing the loan.

8. The PPP loan proceeds must be used by the business on certain permissible expenses —

payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The PPP allows the interest and principal of the

PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spends the loan proceeds on these expense items within

a designated period of time and uses a certain percentage of the PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

2
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 3

9. PPP loan applications were electronically submitted or caused to be submitted by the

borrower and received through SBA servers located in Oregon. Once approved, the business received

the PPP loan proceeds via an electronic funds transfer from the third-party lender to a financial account

under the control of the business.

COUNTS ONE THROUGH FIVE

(Wire Fraud)

10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 are hereby realleged as if fully set forth herein.

11. Beginning in or about May 2020 and continuing until in or about May 2021 defendant

JAMES A. NOLTE knowingly devised, intended to devise, and participated in a scheme to defraud the

United States by submitting fraudulent PPP applications containing false representations.

12. It was part of the scheme that JAMES A NOLTE submitted PPP applications in the

name of a business he owned, or the names of a business others owned. All of the applications submitted

by JAMES A. NOLTE included false representations designed to fraudulently obtain proceeds

ultimately from the SBA.

13. It was a further part of the scheme that JAMES A. NOLTE would misrepresent and

conceal material facts regarding the businesses for which he submitted PPP loan applications, including

the number of employees at the business and the monthly payroll.

14. It was part of the scheme that JAMES A. NOLTE submitted a PPP loan application for

PGO Veteran Services and was awarded $100,922.00. In particular, JAMES A. NOLTE falsely

reported a monthly payroll of $40,369.00 for four employees. In support ofthe loan application, JAMES

A. NOLTE submitted fraudulent wage reports and tax documents.

15. It was part of the scheme that JAMES A. NOLTE submitted a loan application for PG

Health and was awarded $149,900.00. In support of the loan, JAMES A. NOLTE submitted fraudulent

tax documents and wage reports.

3
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 4

16. It was part of the scheme that JAMES A. NOLTE submitted a loan application for RJS

Catering and was awarded a loan of $100,295.00. In support of the loan application, JAMES A.

NOLTE submitted fraudulent tax documents, wage reports and business records.

17. It was part of the scheme that JAMES A. NOLTE submitted a loan application for Dental

Care Plus and was awarded a loan in the amount of $144,900.00. In support of the loan, JAMES A.

NOLTE submitted fraudulent tax documents, payroll reports and other business documents.

18. It was part of the scheme that JAMES A. NOLTE submitted a second draw loan

application for PG Health and was awarded a loan in the amount of $149,700.00. In support of the loan

application, JAMES A. NOLTE submitted fraudulent tax documents, wage reports and business

records.

19. As a result of JAMES A. NOLTE’s scheme, the United States was defrauded out of a

total of $645,717.00. JAMES A. NOLTE used the proceeds of his fraud to his own personal benefit,

paying for his own personal expenses.

20. On or about the dates specified as to each count below, in Bridgeport, Harrison County,

in the Northern District of West Virginia, JAMES A. NOLTE did knowingly transmit or cause to be

transmitted by means of a wire communication in interstate commerce the following writings, signs,

signals, pictures, and sounds:

Count Date Description
1 May 26, 2020 An internet transmission originating from West Virginia to the SBA
server in Virginia constituting a false and fraudulent application for a
PPP loan in the name of”PGO Veteran Services.”
2 July 27, 2020 An internet transmission originating from West Virginia to the SBA
server in Virginia constituting a false and fraudulent application for a
PPP loan in the name of “PG Health”
3 August 13, 2020 An internet transmission originating from West Virginia to the SBA
server in Virginia constituting a false and fraudulent application for a
PPP loan in the name of “RJS Catering”
4
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 5

4 August 13, 2020 An internet transmission originating from West Virginia to the SBA
server in Virginia constituting a false and fraudulent application for a
PPP loan in the name of “Dental Care Plus”
5 May 12, 2021 An internet transmission originating from West Virginia to the SBA
server in Virginia

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

5
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 6

COUNT SIX THROUGH SIXTEEN

(Unlawful Monetary Transactions)

1. Paragraphs 1 through 20 of Count One are re-alleged and incorporated as though fully set

forth herein.

2. On or about the dates set forth in the chart below, each date constituting a separate count

of this Indictment, in Harrison County, in the Northern District of West Virginia, and elsewhere,

defendant JAMES A. NOLTE, did knowingly engage in a monetary transaction through and to a

financial institution, affecting interstate commerce, in criminally derived property of a value greater than

$10,000, that is, the defendant JAMES A. NOLTE, made the following monetary transactions in or

affecting interstate commerce by or through a financial institution with funds having been derived from

a specified unlawful activity, specifically wire fraud in violation of Title 18, United States Code, 1343,

all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957.

Count Date Financial Transaction

6 August 31, 2020 An online payment from a J.P. Morgan
Chase account ending in 3269 in the amount
of $40,567.38.
7 September 2, 2020 Withdrawal of $135,901.44 via a cashier’s
check number 2014091351 to Scott Law
Client Trust Account from a Huntington
Bank account ending in 3535.
8 September 18, 2020 An online transfer from a J.P. Morgan Chase
account ending in 7189 in the amount of
$13,000.00 to a J.P. Morgan Chase account
ending in 3269.
9 September 18, 2020 An online payment from a J.P. Morgan
Chase account ending in 3269 to BJ
Contracting in the amount of $11,975.00.
10 September 23, 2020 An online payment from a J.P. Morgan
Chase account ending in 3269 in the amount
of $14,289.19 to a Citi Bank credit card.
11 September 28, 2020 An online payment from a J.P. Morgan
Chase account ending in 3269 in the amount
of $10,794.20 to a Citi Bank credit card.
12 January 4, 2021 An online transfer from a J.P. Morgan Chase
6
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 7

account ending in 7189 in the amount of
$40,000.00 to a J.P. Morgan Chase account
ending in 3269
13 April 14, 2021 An online transfer from CIT Bank account
ending in 8635 in the amount of
$100,000.00 to a CIT Bank account ending
in 0407.
14 May 3, 2021 An online payment from CIT Bank account
ending in 0407 in the amount of $23,637.41
to a Citi Bank credit card.
15 June 21, 2021 Withdrawal of $137,801.22 via a cashier’s
check number 201477341 1 to James A.
Nolte from a Huntington Bank account
ending in 3535.
16 October 1, 2021 An online transfer from J.P. Morgan Chase
account ending in 7189 in the amount of
$15,000.00 to a J.P. Morgan Chase account
ending in 3269.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957.

7
Case 1:22-cr-00081-TSK-MJA Document 1 Filed 12/06/22 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 8

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION

Wire Fraud

1. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2461(c), Title 18 United States Code,

Sections 981(a)(1)(C), 1956(c)(7)(A), and 1961(1) and Title 21, United States Code, Section 853, the

government will seek the forfeiture of property as part of the sentence imposed in this case, that is, the

forfeiture of any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to a

violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343, or a conspiracy to violate such offense, including

a money judgment in the amount of at least $645,717.00.

2. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), the government will seek

forfeiture of substitute property up to the value of property subject to direct forfeiture that is not available

for forfeiture on account of any act or omission contemplated by Title 21, United States Code, Section

8S3(p)(l).

A true bill,

/5/
Foreperson

/s/
WILLIAM IHLENFELD
United States Attorney

Jennifer T. Conklin
Assistant U.S. Attorney

File and source

File: 1-indictment.pdf
Size: 418,549 bytes
SHA-256: 04cb53c769b02285d90dc9a3a99ecb15f626bc1fd1af756bad7c6666425e6731
Our copy: 1-indictment.pdf
Original: archive.org