Indictment — United States v. Jacob Deandre Byrd, Middle District of Florida (Document 1)

Summary

An indictment in United States of America v. Jacob Deandre Byrd, Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, filed July 14, 2022 as Document 1. Count One charges wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The grand jury alleges that Byrd completed an IRS Form 1040, Schedule C for a non-existent business, Jacob's Beauty, listing gross income of $106,600, and submitted it with a PPP loan application. It alleges that on or about April 4, 2021 Byrd submitted online a PPP Loan Application in the amount of $20,833 to Womply, which the indictment describes as a technology company that assisted businesses in accessing the PPP. The forfeiture section cites 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c).

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 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 1 of 10 PagelD 1

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURF}
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA (2 UL 14 AH 4: 04

CLERK. US DISTRICT COURT
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION ySBLE DISTRICT OF EL
JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
JACOB DEANDRE BYRD 18 U.S.C. § 1343
INDICTMENT
The Grand Jury charges:

COUNT ONE
(WIRE FRAUD)

A. Introduction

At all times relevant to this Indictment:

1. The defendant resided in the Middle District of Florida.

2. Womply is a nationwide technology company that assisted
businesses in accessing the Small Business Administration Paycheck Protection
Program.

3. Womply utilized computer servers / data centers in Virginia and
Oregon, as part of conducting nationwide business operations.

The Small Business Administration

4, The United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an
executive branch agency of the United States government that provided support

to entrepreneurs and small businesses.
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 2 of 10 PagelD 2

5. The SBA enabled and provided for loans through banks, credit
unions, and other lenders. These loans had government-backed guarantees. In
addition to traditional SBA funding programs, The CARES Act, established

several new temporary programs and provided for the expansion of others to
address the COVID-19 outbreak.

The Paycheck Protection Program

6. One of the new programs was the SBA Paycheck Protection
Program (“PPP”), which was a loan designed to provide a direct incentive for
small businesses to keep their workers on the payroll. Under this program, the
SBA could forgive all or part of loans, if employees were kept on the payroll for
eight weeks and borrowers submitted documentation confirming that the loan
proceeds were used for certain qualifying business expenses (1.e., payroll, rent,
mortgage interest, or utilities).

7. The PPP application process required interested applicants to
electronically submit a Borrower Application Form, a SBA Form 2483. The
application contained information as to the purpose of the loan, average monthly
payroll, number of employees, and background of the business and its owner.
Applicants were also required to make certain good faith certifications, including

that economic uncertainties had necessitated their loan requests for continued
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 3 of 10 PagelD 3

business operations, and that they intended to use loan proceeds only for the
authorized purposes.

8. Further, when submitting the SBA Form 2483, the authorized
representative certified his understanding that, should the PPP funds be
knowingly used for unauthorized purposes, the United States could hold him
legally liable, including for charges of fraud. The applicant was also required to
certify the truth and accuracy of any information provided on the SBA Form
2483 and in all supporting documents, to include any documents intended to
verify the applicant’s payroll expenses. The applicant was required to certify an
understanding that knowingly making a false statement to obtain a guaranteed

loan from the SBA is punishable under the law and subject to criminal penalties.

B. The Scheme and Artifice
9. Beginning on an unknown date, but no later than in or around
February 2021, and continuing through at least in or around April 2021, in the
Middle District of Florida and elsewhere, the defendant,
JACOB DEANDRE BYRD,
knowingly devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and to
obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses,

representations, and promises.
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 4 of 10 PagelD 4

C. Manner and Means of the Scheme and Artifice
10. The manner and means by which the defendant sought to
accomplish the scheme to defraud included, among others, the following:

a. It was part of the scheme and artifice that the defendant
would and did fraudulently complete an IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or
Loss From Business” for purposes of applying for a PPP loan to which he was not
entitled;

b. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant listed a non-existent business: Jacob’s Beauty; |

C. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant stated that he materially participated in the operation of
his business, Jacob’s Beauty, during 2019;

d. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant stated that he started or acquired the business, Jacob’s

Beauty, during 2019;
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 5 of 10 PagelD 5

e. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant listed Gross income for his business, Jacob’s Beauty, as
$106,600;

f. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant listed for his business, Jacob’s Beauty, $2,250 in supply
expenses;

g. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant listed for his business, Jacob’s Beauty, $3,000 in travel
expenses;

h. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that when
fraudulently completing the IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business” the defendant listed for his business, Jacob’s Beauty, $3,400 in wage
expenses;

i. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that, in order to
induce the SBA and a SBA Participating Lender to fund a PPP loan for the non-

existent business, the defendant would and did submit, a false and fraudulent loan
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 6 of 10 PagelD 6

application that included multiple materially false and fraudulent representations
and pretenses, such as:

i. stating a business name, owner, address, telephone
number, number of employees, and gross revenue, suggesting that the company
was an operating business;

ii. certifying that the business was in operation on

February 15, 2020;

iii. certifying that the funds will be used to maintain
payroll;
iv. certifying the truth of the statements in the application;
and
V. including fraudulent supporting documentation, that is,

a fraudulently completed IRS Form 1040, Schedule C, “Profit or Loss From
Business.”

j. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that the
defendant would and did open a financial institution account into which the
fraudulently-obtained PPP funds would be transferred via a wire;

k. It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that the
defendant would and did cause a SBA Participating Lender to send PPP loan

proceeds via a wire transfer;
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 7 of 10 PagelD 7

1, It was further a part of the scheme and artifice that the
defendant would and did retain fraud proceeds for the defendant’s personal
enrichment and entertainment;

m. It was further a part of scheme and artifice that the defendant
would and did perform acts, and make statements to promote and achieve the
object of the scheme and artifice and to misrepresent, hide, and conceal, and
cause to be misrepresented, hidden, and concealed, the purpose of the scheme

and artifice and the acts committed in furtherance thereof.

D. Execution of the Scheme and Artifice

11. Onor about April 4, 2021, in the Middle District of Florida and

elsewhere, the defendant,
JACOB DEANDRE BYRD,

for the purpose of executing the scheme and artifice described above, transmitted
and caused to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television
communication in interstate and foreign commerce, certain writings, signals,
signs, pictures, and sounds, that is, the on-line electronic submission of a PPP
Loan Application in the amount of $20,833, to Womply.

In violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343.
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 8 of 10 PagelD 8

FORFEITURE

1. The allegations contained in Count One are incorporated by

reference for the purpose of alleging forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

981(a)(1\(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c).

2. Upon conviction of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, the defendant

shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28

U.S.C. § 2461(c), any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived

from proceeds traceable to the violation.

3. If any of the property described above, as a result of any act or

omission of the defendant:

a.

b.

cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third
party,

has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court;
has been substantially diminished in value; or
has been commingled with other property which cannot be

divided without difficulty,
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 9 of 10 PagelD 9

the United States shall be entitled to forfeiture of substitute property pursuant to

21 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated by 28 U.S.C. § Aotb/
A TRUEBLLA.

‘KOGER B. HANDBERG
United States Attorney

Kevin C. Frein
Assistant United States Attorney

~ Frank Talbot
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Jacksonville Division
Case 3:22-cr-00091-BJD-MCR Document1 Filed 07/14/22 Page 10 of 10 PagelD 10

FORM OBD-34
7/14/22 Revised No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Middle District of Florida
Jacksonville Division

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.

JACOB DEANDRE BYRD

INDICTMENT

Violations: 18 sche tye

A true bill,

ar 4

WA open court this Loft. day

of July, 2022.

Clerk

Bail $

GPO 863 525


File and source

File

1-indictment.pdf

Size

420,261 bytes

SHA-256

db5993b4587ac030a980bdd9b4a195f0167e4e7c44afa67dc3847033b65f3912

Our copy

1-indictment.pdf

Original

archive.org