Indictment — United States v. D’Angelo Ferguson and Catherine Spidell-Ferguson, Eastern District of Michigan

Summary

A grand jury indictment against D’Angelo Ferguson and Catherine Spidell-Ferguson, Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, filed April 17, 2025 as ECF No. 1. Count One charges conspiracy to commit bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1349 from approximately March 2021 through approximately February 2023, and Counts Two through Four charge bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344(2). The indictment alleges misrepresented payroll and employee numbers, false certifications that non-operational businesses were operational, and fictitious payroll, bank and tax records. The bank fraud counts list PPP applications for Titanium Transport LLC and Armani Express LLC to Credit Union One and for Ferguson Logistics LLC to PNC Bank. The forfeiture allegations seek a money judgment in an amount to be determined.

Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.1 Filed 04/17/25 Page1of11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

United States of America, Case: 2:25-er-20269

Assigned To : Michelson, Laurie J.
nti Referral Judge: Stafford, Elizabeth A.
Plaintiff, Assign. Date : 4/17/2025
Description: IND USA V. SEALED
V MATTER (MC)

D-1, D’ Angelo Ferguson, Violations:
D-2, Catherine Spidell-Ferguson, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1344, 1349

Defendants.
/

INDICTMENT

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

At times relevant to this Indictment:

Paycheck Protection Program

1. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a
federal law enacted in or around March 2020 and designed to provide emergency
financial assistance to the millions of Americans who were suffering the economic
effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. One source of relief provided by the
CARES Act was the authorization of up to $349 billion in forgivable loans to small

businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a program referred

//
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.2 Filed 04/17/25 Page 2of11

to as the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). In or around April 2020, Congress
authorized over $300 billion in additional PPP funding.

2. In order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required to submit a
PPP loan application, which is signed by an authorized representative of the
business. The PPP loan application requires 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.

3. In the PPP loan application, the small business (through its authorized
representative) must state, among other things, its: (a) average monthly payroll
expenses; and (b) number of employees. These figures are used to calculate the
amount of money the small business is eligible to receive under the PPP. In addition,
businesses applying for a PPP loan often provided documentation supporting their
purported payroll expenses.

4. A PPP loan application had to be processed by a participating lender. Ifa PPP
loan application was approved, the participating lender funded the PPP loan using
its own monies, which were generally guaranteed by the Small Business
Administration (“SBA”). Data from the application, including information about
the borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of employees, was

transmitted by the lender to the SBA in the course of processing the loan.
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.3 Filed 04/17/25 Page 3 of11

5. PPP loan proceeds were required to only be used by the business on certain
permissible expenses—generally payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, utilities
and other explained business expenses. The PPP allowed the interest and principal
on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on
these expense items within a designated period of time after receiving the proceeds
and used a certain amount of the PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

The Defendants

6. Defendant D’ Angelo Ferguson (FERGUSON) was a resident of the Eastern
District of Michigan.

7. Defendant Catherine Spidell-Ferguson (SPIDELL-FERGUSON) was a
resident of the Eastern District of Michigan.

Purpose of the Scheme and Artifice to Obtain

8. The purpose of the scheme and artifice to obtain was for the defendants to
obtain money and enrich themselves by, among other things, inducing financial
institutions, through materially false and fraudulent representations and pretenses, to
issue improper PPP loans, and then diverting those loan proceeds to impermissible
uses.

The Scheme and Artifice to Obtain

9. As part of the scheme and artifice to obtain, the defendants caused materially

false and fraudulent representations to be made to financial institutions, including
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.4 Filed 04/17/25 Page 4of11

materially false and fraudulent representations relating to the purported entitlement
of various business entities to PPP loan assistance. PPP loan assistance funds issued
because of the materially false and fraudulent representations were then received by
the defendants and used for impermissible purposes.

10. As part of the scheme and artifice to obtain, the defendants caused:

a. Misrepresentations to be made regarding purported payroll
expenditures by various business entities;

b. Misrepresentations to be made regarding the purported number of
employees of various business entities;

c. Misrepresentations to be made regarding the purported purpose of PPP
loan requests for various business entities;

d. False certifications to be made indicating that PPP loan proceeds would
only be used for permissible business-related purposes;

e. False certifications to be made indicating that various non-operational
business entities were operational and that those entities paid employee
salaries;

f. Fictitious payroll records to be created and submitted to financial
institutions;

g. Fictious bank records to be created and submitted to financial

institutions; and
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.5 Filed 04/17/25 Page5of11

h. Fictitious tax records to be created and submitted to financial

institutions.

COUNT ONE

(18 U.S.C. § 1349 — Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud)
11. The allegations in Paragraphs | — 10 are hereby realleged and incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
12. From at least in or around approximately March 2021, through at least in or
around approximately February 2023, in the Eastern District of Michigan, and
elsewhere, the defendants,

D-2, Catherin Spidell-Ferguson

along with others known and unknown, did knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily
combine, conspire, confederate, and agree to commit certain offenses, that is,

a. to violate Title 18, United States Code, Section 1344(2), that is to
knowingly execute a scheme and artifice to obtain moneys and funds
under the custody and control of financial institutions whose
deposits were insured by the National Credit Union Administration
or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, by means of
materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and
promises.

Object of the Conspiracy
5
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.6 Filed 04/17/25 Page 6 of 11

13. The object of the conspiracy was the same as the purpose of the scheme and
artifice to obtain set forth in Paragraph 8 of this Indictment, which is realleged and
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
Manner and Means of the Conspiracy

14. In furtherance of this conspiracy, and to accomplish its object, the methods,
manner, and means that were used are described in Paragraphs 9 and 10 of this
Indictment and are realleged and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth
herein.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349.

COUNTS TWO THROUGH FOUR

(18 U.S.C. §§ 1344(2) and (2)—Bank Fraud)
15. Paragraphs | through 10 of this Indictment are realleged and incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein
16. On or about the dates specified as to each count below, in the Eastern District
of Michigan and elsewhere, the defendants, as specified below, did knowingly
’ execute a scheme and artifice to obtain moneys and funds under the custody and
control of, financial institutions, by means of materially false and fraudulent

pretenses, representations, and promises.
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.7 Filed 04/17/25 Page 7 of11

Purpose of the Scheme and Artifice to Obtain

17. The grand jury realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraph 8 of this
Indictment as though fully set forth herein as a description of the purpose of the
scheme and artifice.

The Scheme and Artifice to Obtain

18. The grand jury realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 9 and 10
of this Indictment as though fully set forth herein as a description of the scheme and
artifice.

Execution of the Scheme and Artifice

19. Onor about the dates specified as to each count below, in the Eastern District
of Michigan, and elsewhere, the defendants did execute, and cause the execution of,
the aforesaid scheme and artifice to obtain monies and funds under the custody and
control of the specified financial institutions, as that term is defined in Title 18,

United States Code, Section 20:
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.8 Filed 04/17/25 Page 8 of 11

Count

Defendant(s)

Approximate
Date

Financial
Institution

Description of
Execution

D’ Angelo Ferguson

Catherine Spidell-
Ferguson

March 2021

Credit Union
One

Submission of False
and Fraudulent PPP
Application and
Supporting
Documents for
Titanium Transport
LLC

D’ Angelo Ferguson

Catherine Spidell-
Ferguson

April 2021

PNC Bank

Submission of False
and Fraudulent PPP
Application and
Supporting
Documents for
Ferguson Logistics
LLC

D’ Angelo Ferguson

May 2021

Credit Union
One

Submission of False
and Fraudulent PPP
Application and
Supporting
Documents for
Armani Express LLC

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344(2) and 2.
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.9 Filed 04/17/25 Page 9of11

FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS
18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) & 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), 18 U.S.C. 982(a)(2)

20. The allegations contained in Counts One through Four of this Indictment are
incorporated by reference for the purpose of alleging forfeiture pursuant to the
provisions of 18 U.S.C. 981(a)(1)(C) together with 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), and 18
U.S.C. § 982(a)(2).

21. Asaresult of the violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349 as set forth in Count One of
this Indictment, the defendants shall forfeit to the United States any property, real or
personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offense.

22. Asa result of the violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1344(2) and 2, as set forth in
Counts Two through Four of this Indictment, the defendants shall forfeit to the
United States any property constituting, or derived from, proceeds the person
obtained directly or indirectly, as the result of the offense.

23. Money Judgment: Such property further includes, but is not limited to, a
money judgment in an amount to be determined, representing the proceeds the
defendant obtained as a result of such violation.

24. Substitute Assets: Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated by 18
U.S.C. § 982(b), each defendant shall forfeit substitute property, up to the value of
the properties identified for forfeiture, if, by any act or omission of the defendant:
the properties identified for forfeiture cannot be located upon the exercise of due

diligence; have been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party; have

9
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.10 Filed 04/17/25 Page 10 of 11

been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court; have been substantially diminished

in value; or have been commingled with other property which cannot be divided

without difficulty.
THIS IS A TRUE BILL
s/ Grand Jury Foreperson
GRAND JURY FOREPERSON
JULIE A. BECK

Acting United States Attorney

s/ Ryan A. Particka

Ryan A. Particka
Chief, White Collar Crime Unit

s/ Andrew J. Yahkind
ANDREW J. YAHKIND
Assistant U.S. Attorney

s/ Carl D. Gilmer-Hill
CARL D. GILMER-HILL
Assistant U.S. Attorney

Dated: April 17, 2025

10
Case 2:25-cr-20269-LJM-EAS ECF No.1, PagelD.11 Filed 04/17/25 Page 11 of 11

Case: 2:25-cr-20269
Assigned To : Michelson, Laurie J.

U ds Referral Judge: Stafford, Elizabeth A.

nited States District Court Criminal Case Cov Assign. Date : 4/17/2025

Eastern District of Michigan ove Description: IND USA V. SEALED
MATTER (MC)

NOTE: It is the responsibility of the Assistant U.S. Attorney signing this form to complete it accurately in all respects.

“| Companion Case Number:

Judge Assigned:

Case Title: USA v. D-1, D'Angelo Ferguson, D-2, Catherine Spidell-Ferguson

County where offense occurred : Oakland

Check One: [X]Felony LJMisdemeanor L]Petty
¥_Indictment/ Information -- no prior complaint.
Indictment/ Information --- based upon prior complaint [Case number: ]
Indictment/ Information --- based upon LCrR 57.10 (d) [Complete Superseding section below].
e Information
Superseding to Case No: Judge:

[_]Corrects errors; no additional charges or defendants.
[_]Involves, for plea purposes, different charges or adds counts.
[_ ]Embraces same subject matter but adds the additional defendants or charges below:

Defendant name Charges Prior Complaint (if applicable)

Please take notice that the below listed Assistant United States Attorney is the attorney of record for
the above captioned case.

April 17, 2025 s/Carl Gilmer-Hill
Date Carl Gilmer-Hill

Assistant United States Attorney
211 W. Fort Street, Suite 2001
Detroit, MI 48226-3277
Phone: 313-226-9585
Fax: 313-226-2311
E-Mail address: Carl.gilmer-hill@usdoj.gov
Attorney Bar #; CA 161939

1 Companion cases are matters in which it appears that (1) substantially similar evidence will be offered at trial, or (2) the same
or related parties are present, and the cases arise out of the same transaction or occurrence. Cases may be companion cases

even though one of them may have already been terminated.
5/16


File and source

File

1-indictment.pdf

Size

352,009 bytes

SHA-256

77dad019e4c6a453ceba726ccbf716c1402cb76f552f028854c6a0c2ddf1f2c2

Our copy

1-indictment.pdf

Original

archive.org