Indictment — No. 4:25-cr-00552 (Dkt. 2, E.D. Mo.)

Summary

An indictment filed October 29, 2025 as Doc. #2 in United States v. Alexander Sampson and Dana Kelly, No. 4:25CR552 SEP/SRW (Case 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW), in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, marked SUPPRESSED. Count 1 is captioned Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud and alleges a conspiracy between on or about August 1, 2019 and on or about August 1, 2021 to defraud the Small Business Administration and financial institutions, with an introduction describing the Paycheck Protection Program and Itria Ventures, LLC as a participating lender. Count Two is captioned Wire Fraud, and Counts Three and Four are captioned Making a False Statement. A forfeiture allegation follows.

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

Cite this document

“Indictment — No. 4:25-cr-00552 (Dkt. 2, E.D. Mo.).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/indictment-no-4-25-cr-00552-dkt-2-e-d-mo-47405cea48/, SHA-256 5cfb3f399aaa41852f793dc01bec5ba1ad186ee2059554f8c10300408db6cb7b.

Full text

Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 1 of 13 PageID
#: 33

SUPPRESSED

UNITED STATES DISTRJCT COURT
EASTERN DISTRJCT OF MISSOURI
FILED
EASTERN DIVISION
OCT 2 !) 2025
UNITED STATES OF AMERJCA, ) U. S. DISTRICT COURT
) EASTERN DISTRICT Of MO
ST. LOUIS
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
~ 4:25CR552 SEP/SRW
ALEXANDER SAMPSON )
AND DANA KELLY, )
)
Defendants. )

INDICTMENT

The Grand Jury charges:

COUNT 1

(Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud)

A. Introduction

1. The Paycheck Protection Program ("PPP") was a COVID-19 pandemic relief program

administered by the Small Business Administration ("SBA") that provided forgivable loans to small

businesses for job retention and certain other expenses. The PPP permitted participating third-party

lenders to approve and disburse SBA-backed PPP loans to cover payroll, fixed debts, utilities,

rent/mortgage, accounts payable and other bills incurred by qualifying businesses during, and

resulting from , the COVID-19 pandemic. PPP loans were fully guaranteed by the SBA.

1
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 2 of 13 PageID
#: 34

2. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business had to submit a PPP loan application, which

was signed by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP loan application required the

business (through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the program rul es and make certain

affirmative certifications to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan, including that the business was in

operation and either had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll taxes or paid independent

contractors. A business applying for a PPP loan was required to provide documentation showing

its payroll expenses, such as filed federal income tax documents.

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

borrower and received through SBA servers located in Virginia and 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.

4. The PPP permitted participating third-party lenders to approve and di sburse SBA-backed

PPP loans to cover payroll, fixed debts, utilities, rent/mortgage, accounts payab le and other bills

incurred by qualify ing businesses during, and resulting from , the COVID- 19 pandemic. PPP loans

are fully guaranteed by the SBA. In the event of default, SBA wo uld fully satisfy the lender for any

balance remaining on the loan. Once approved for a PPP loan by a participating third-party lender,

small businesses could receive loans of up to $10,000,000.

5. A PPP loan application was processed by the third-party participating lender with whom the

application was filed. If a PPP loan application was approved, the patticipating lender would fund

the PPP loan; in order to encourage PPP loans to be issued, the loan was guaranteed by the SBA.

2
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 3 of 13 PageID
#: 35

Data from the application , including information from 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.

6. The proceeds of a PPP loan could be used for certain specified items, such as payroll costs,

costs related to the continuation of group health care benefits, or mortgage interest payments. The

proceeds of a PPP loan were not permitted to be used by the borrowers to purchase consumer goods,

automobiles, personal residences, clothing, jewelry, to pay the borrower' s personal federal income

taxes, or to fund the borrower' s ordinary day-to-day li ving expenses unrelated to the specified

authorized expenses.

7. Under the app licable PPP rules and guidance, recipients of PPP loans could apply to have

the interest and principal on the PPP loan fully forgiven , meaning that the borrower would owe

nothing and would have no obligation to repay the PPP loan. To obtain full forgiveness of the PPP

loan, borrowers had to attest that they had " not reduced the number of employees or the average

paid hours of [their] employees" during the loan period, that the loan proceeds had been spent on

payroll costs and other permitted expenses and that at least 60% of the loan proceeds had been spent

on payroll costs.

8. Itria Ventures, LLC was a Delaware third party participating lender for SBA PPP loans.

B. Conspiracy

9. Between on or about August 1, 2019, and continuing to on or about August 1, 2021 , within

the Eastern District of Missouri and elsewhere, the defendants,

3
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 4 of 13 PageID
#: 36

ALEXANDER SAMPSON
AND
DANA KELLY,

and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did voluntarily and intentionally combine,

conspire, confederate and agree with each other, to devise and intend to devise a scheme and artifice

to defraud the Small Business Administration, an agency of the United States and financial

institutions through use of interstate wire communications, in violation of Title 18, United States

Code, Section 1343.

C. Manner and Means

The ways, manner, and means by which the foregoing objective of the conspiracy to commit wire

fraud were to be accomplished included, but were not limited to, the following:

10. The primary purpose of the conspiracy was for defendant Alexander Sampson, defendant

Dana Kelly, and persons unknown to the Grand Jury, to defraud the Small Business Administration,

an agency of the United States, to secure a PPP loan from a federal government program for which

they were ineligible.

11 . It was part of the scheme and artifice to defraud and to obtain money and property that:

a. Defendant Dana Kelly organized "The Firm D&B LLC," a tax preparation service, with

the Missouri Secretary of State on or about November 16, 2016.

b. Defendant Dana Kelly organized "Reign Restaurant LLC" ("Reign") with the Missouri

Secretary of State on or about August 14, 2019, and used the Articles of Organization

issued by the Missouri Secretary of State to obtain an Employer Identification Number

4
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 5 of 13 PageID
#: 37

("EIN"), a tax identification number issued to businesses, from the Internal Revenue

Service.

c. Reign opened its doors for business on or about July 27, 2020.

d. On or about August 17, 2020, Defendant Alexander Sampson and Defendant Dana

Kelly used the EIN issued for Reign to open a business checking account with Bank of

America.

e. In submitting an application for a PPP loan to ltria Ventures, LLC, on or about

February 11 , 2021 , Defendant Alexander Sampson falsely asserted, on SBA Form

2483 , titled "Paycheck Protection Program Borrower Application Form Revised

January 8, 2021 ," the following:

1. Reign was established on January 1, 2019;

11. The average monthly payroll was $158,884;

111. Reign had 49 employees;

1v. Alexander Sampson owned 70% of Reign;

v. The purpose of the PPP loans was to assist with payroll costs, rent/mortgage

interest, and utilities;

v1. Reign was in operation on February 15 , 2020, and had employees for whom it

paid salaries and payroll taxes or paid independent contractors; and

v11. The economic uncertainty of the pandemic made the loan necessary to support

5
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 6 of 13 PageID
#: 38

the ongoing operation of Reign.

f. In support of the PPP loan, Defendant Alexander Sampson submitted to Itria Ventures

LLC the fraudulently prepared Internal Revenue Service Form 940 for 2019 :

Employer's Annual Federal Unemployment (FUTA) Tax Return, and thro ugh which

B.R., an employee of Defendant Dana Kelly's tax preparation business, "The Firm,"

claimed that in tax year 2019, Reign paid $1,399,297.47 to its employees and paid the

State of Missouri unemployment taxes.

g. As further support of its PPP application, Defendant Alexander Sampson submitted to

Itria Ventures LLC Internal Revenue Service Form 1065 styled, "U.S. Return of

Partnership Income," purportedly prepared by B.R., an employee of Defendant Dana

Kelly's tax preparation business, "The Firm," and which made the following fraudulent

claims:

1. For tax year 2019, Reign grossed $3,458,595 in gross receipts or sales, paid

$1,399,297.47 to its employees, and made guaranteed payments to partners

totaling $597,500;

11. Defendant Alexander Sampson's share of the profit, loss, and capital was 60%;

111. Defendant Dana Kelly's share of the profit, loss, and capital was 10%, and she

was the partnership 's designated representative; and

1v. R.M.T. , D.K.R., R.R.J. , R.E.J., and L.L.C. held a 5% share of Reign's profit,

loss, and capital, for a total of 25% of the business.

6
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 7 of 13 PageID
#: 39

I. In support of the PPP loan, Defendant Alexander Sampson also submitted the

fraudulently prepared Internal Revenue Service Form 941 for 2020: Employer' s

QUARTERLY Federal Tax Return, and through which B.R., an employee of Defendant

Dana Kelly's tax preparation business, "The Firm," claimed that in the first quarter of

2020, Reign paid wages, tips, and compensation of $346,937.89 to its employees,

withheld $18,098.90 in federal income tax from the wages, tips, and other

compensation, and had a tax liability of $71 ,180.34.

m. On or about February 13, 2021 , Defendant Alexander Sampson finalized a PPP loan

for Reign and directed loan proceeds of $397,210 to be deposited into the Bank of

America account of Reign for which he and Defendant Dana Kelly were the sole

signatories.

n. On or about July 6, 2021 , in seeking forgiveness of the $397,210 PPP loan, Defendant

Alexander Sampson made the following false statements on SBA Form 3508EZ, styled

"PPP Loan Forgiveness Application Form 3508EZ Revised January 19, 2021":

1. Between February 18, 2021 , to April 14, 2021 , Reign paid $278,047 for payroll

and $39,150 for utilities;

11. They sought forgiveness of the $397,210 PPP loan on the grounds that the total

disbursement been used to pay eligible business costs; and

111. Reign was unable to operate at the same level of business activity as before

February 15, 2020, due to compliance with COVID-19 requirements established

7
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 8 of 13 PageID
#: 40

by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Director of the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention, or the Occupational Safety and Health

Administration.

o. Defendant Alexander Sampson and Defendant Dana Kelly used $234,629.68 of the

PPP loan that had been electronically deposited into the Bank of America business

account issued to Reign for personal and non-allowable expenses including, but not

limited to: dining out, clothing, and car loans.

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

8
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 9 of 13 PageID
#: 41

COUNT TWO

(Wire Fraud)

The allegations set forth above are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.

10. Between on or about August 1, 2019, and continuing to on or about August 1, 2021 , in the

Eastern District of Missouri, and elsewhere, the defendants, ALEXANDER SAMPSON and

DANA KELLY, with the intent to defraud, devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to

defraud the Small Business Administration and to obtain money and property from the Small

Business Administration by means of material false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and

promises, as described further herein.

12. On or about February 11 , 2021 , in the Eastern District of Missouri, the defendants,

ALEXANDER SAMPSON
AND
DANA KELLY,

for the purpose of executing the above-described scheme to defraud, did cause to be transmitted,

by means of interstate wire transmissions, specifically, a fraudulent PPP loan application on behalf

of Reign Restaurant, LLC.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343 and 2.

9
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 10 of 13 PageID
#: 42

COUNT THREE

(Making a False Statement)

The allegations set forth above are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as iffully set out herein.

13 . On or about February 11 , 2021, in the Eastern District of Missouri, the defendants,

ALEXANDER SAMPSON
AND
DANA KELLY,

did willfully and knowingly make and use a false writing and document, knowing the same to

contain a materially fal se, fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry in a matter within the

jurisdiction of the Small Business Administration, an agency of the executive branch of the United

States, by submitting Internal Revenue Service Form 1065, styled "U.S. Return of Partnership

Income," claiming that Reign had gross receipts or sales of $3,458,595 and paid salaries and wages

of $1,399,297 in tax year 2019, when in fact, Reign was not in operation during tax year 2019 and

did not open for business until July 27, 2020.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 100l(a)(3) and 2.

COUNT FOUR

(Making a False Statement)

The allegations set forth above are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein .

14. On or about February 11 , 2021, in the Eastern District of Missouri, the defendants,

ALEXANDER SAMPSON
AND
DANA KELLY,
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 11 of 13 PageID
#: 43

did willfully and knowingly make and use a false writing and document, knowing the same to

contain a materially false, fictitious, and fraudu lent statement and entry in a matter within the

jurisdiction of the Small Business Adm inistration, an agency of the executive branch of the United

States, by submitting Internal Revenue Service Form 941 for 2020: Employer's QUARTERLY

Federal Tax Return claiming that for the first quarter of 2020, that being January, February, and

March 2020, Reign paid wages, tips, and other compensation in the amount of $346,937.89 to 42

employees and w ithheld federal income tax of $18 ,098.90 from the wages, tips, and other

compensation, when in fact, Reign was not in operation in January, February, and March 2020 and

did not open for business until July 27, 2020.

In vio lation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001(a)(3) and 2.

11
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 12 of 13 PageID
#: 44

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION

The Grand Jury further finds by probable cause that:

I. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 982(a)(2)(A) and 1343, upon

conviction of an offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343 as set forth in

Count 2, the defendant shall forfeit to the United States of America any property constituting, or

derived from, proceeds the defendant obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of such violation(s)

and any personal property used or intended to be used to commit the offense.

2. Subject to forfeiture is a sum of money equal to the total value of any property

constituting, or derived from , proceeds the defendant obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of

the violation set forth in Count 2.

3. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 982(a)(2)(B) and 1001, upon

conviction of an offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 as set forth in

Counts 3 and 4, the defendant shall forfeit to the United States of America any property constituting,

or derived from, proceeds the defendant obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of such

violation(s) and any personal property used or intended to be used to commit the offense.

4. Subject to forfeiture is a sum of money equal to the total value of any property

constituting, or derived from , proceeds the defendant obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of

the violations set forth in Counts 3 and 4.

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

of the defendant(s):

12
Case: 4:25-cr-00552-SEP-SRW Doc. #: 2 Filed: 10/29/25 Page: 13 of 13 PageID
#: 45

a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited w ith, a third party;

c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court;

d. has been substantially diminished in value; or

e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without

difficulty,

the United States of America wi ll be entitled to the forfe iture of substitute property pursuant to Title

21 , United States Code, Section 853(p).

A TRUE BILL.

FOREPERSON

THOMAS C. ALBUS
United States Attorney

TRACY LYNN BERRY - 014753 TN
Assistant United States Attorney

File and source

File: 2.pdf
Size: 211,231 bytes
SHA-256: 5cfb3f399aaa41852f793dc01bec5ba1ad186ee2059554f8c10300408db6cb7b
Our copy: 2.pdf
Original: No public link identified.