Information — United States v. Holly Lynn Urban, Middle District of Florida (Document 1)

Summary

A criminal information in United States of America v. Holly Lynn Urban, filed January 5, 2022 as Document 1 in No. 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Count One charges conspiracy to commit bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1349. It alleges that from at least as early as on or about April 10, 2020 through at least in or about May 2020, conspirators submitted fraudulent PPP applications to CenterState Bank and Customers Bank for Helly Tec LLC, HFSG LLC, MMHFSG LLC, Goshawk Optical LLC and Doggo Enterprises LLC, with false payroll figures and fabricated documents. It alleges that the conspirators spent and attempted to spend those proceeds on items not authorized under the PPP, including FedEx routes. The forfeiture allegation seeks a money judgment of $632,000 and seized funds of approximately $50,000 and $67,845.66.

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 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 1 of 9 PagelD 1

riLeED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ae
ORLANDO DIVISION 2022 JAN-5S PM 3:45
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : SISTRICT OF FLoRia

rLORIDA

v, CASE NO. 6:22-cr- or- bCC- BCI
18 U.S.C. § 1349
HOLLY LYNN URBAN

INFORMATION

The United States Attorney charges:

COUNT ONE
(Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud)

A. Introduction

At times material to this Information:

1. HOLLY LYNN URBAN resided in Reunion, Florida, in the Middle
District of Florida.

2. Helly Tec LLC was a limited liability company that Conspirator-1
formed in Florida, on or about June 21, 2017. The formation documents listed
Conspirator-1 as the manager and registered agent of Helly Tec LLC. On or about
September 18, 2017, Conspirator-1 removed himself and added HOLLY LYNN
URBAN as the registered agent and manager of Helly Tec LLC. On or about May
28, 2019, HOLLY LYNN URBAN removed herself and added Conspirator-1 as the
registered agent and manager of Helly Tec LLC. Conspirator-1 voluntarily

dissolved Helly Tec LLC on or about June 12, 2019.
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 2 of 9 PagelD 2

3. HFSG LLC was a limited liability company that HOLLY LYNN
URBAN formed in Florida, on or about April 1, 2019. The formation documents
listed HOLLY LYNN URBAN as the registered agent and manager of HFSG LLC.
On or about October 21, 2019, HOLLY LYNN URBAN registered Conspirator-1 as
the new registered agent of HFSG LLC. HOLLY LYNN URBAN remained the
manager of HFSG LLC.

4. MMHFSG LLC was a limited liability company that HOLLY LYNN
URBAN formed in Florida, on or about May 9, 2019. The formation documents
listed HOLLY LYNN URBAN as the registered agent and manager of MMHFSG
LLC.

5. Goshawk Optical LLC was a limited liability company that HOLLY
LYNN URBAN formed in Florida, on or about July 3, 2019. HOLLY LYNN
URBAN listed herself as the manager of Goshawk Optical LLC.

6. Doggo Enterprises LLC was a limited liability company that HOLLY
LYNN URBAN formed in Florida, on or about February 17, 2020. The formation
documents listed HOLLY LYNN URBAN as the sole authorized member of Doggo
Enterprises LLC.

7. In or around March 2020, in response to the economic crisis caused by
the novel coronavirus pandemic, the United States Congress passed the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, Pub. L. No. 116-136, 134 Stat. 281 (2020)
(“CARES Act”). Among other things, the CARES Act made available to qualified
small businesses billions of dollars’ worth of government-guaranteed loans, through

2
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 3 of 9 PagelD 3

the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). The purpose of PPP loans was to help
small businesses that were suffering from the economic downturn to continue to pay
salary or wages to their employees.

8. The PPP was administered by the Small Business Administration
(SBA), which promulgated regulations concerning eligibility for PPP loans. Eligible
businesses could apply for a PPP loan through a federally insured depository
institution.

9. To qualify for a loan under the PPP, an applicant had to meet certain
criteria including, among other things, that it (the business) was “in operation on
February 15, 2020 and either had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll
taxes or paid independent contractors, as reported on Form(s) 1099-MISC.”
Moreover, the loan amount that could be approved under the PPP and implementing
regulations typically was a function of the applicant’s historical payroll costs.
Accordingly, to obtain a PPP loan, the applicant was required to state, among other
things, its average monthly payroll expenses and number of employees. The
applicant was also required to provide documentation of the business’s payroll
expenses.

10. The proceeds of a PPP loan could be used only for certain specified
items, such as payroll costs, costs related to the continuation of group health care
benefits, mortgage interest payments (but not mortgage prepayments or principal
payments), rent payments, utility payments, interest payments on debt obligations
that were incurred before February 15, 2020, or refinancing certain specified SBA

3
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Documenti1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 4 of 9 PagelD 4

loans. The proceeds of a PPP loan were not permitted to be used to fund the
borrower's ordinary day-to-day living expenses, or anything unrelated to the
specified authorized expenses.

11. CenterState Bank of Florida (“CenterState Bank”) and Customers Bank
each were banks the deposits of which were insured by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC). CenterState Bank and Customers Bank each
therefore constituted a “financial institution” for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §§ 20 and
1344.

B. The Conspiracy

12. Beginning on an unknown date, but at least as early as on or about
April 10, 2020, and continuing through at least in or about May 2020, in the Middle
District of Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant,

HOLLY LYNN URBAN,
did knowingly and willfully combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with others
known and unknown to the United States Attorney, to commit bank fraud: that is, to
knowingly, and with intent to defraud, execute and attempt to execute a scheme and
artifice to defraud a financial institution and to obtain any of the moneys, funds,
credits, assets, and other property owned by, and under the custody and control of a
financial institution by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses,

representations, and promises, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344.
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Documenti1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 5 of 9PagelD 5

C. Purpose and Object of the Conspiracy
13. It was the purpose and object of the scheme and artifice for HOLLY

LYNN URBAN and others known and unknown to the United States Attorney to
fraudulently obtain moneys, funds, credits, assets, and other property owned by, and
under the custody and control of a financial institution, namely, PPP loan proceeds,
and to spend those proceeds on items that were not authorized under the PPP.

D. Manner and Means of the Conspiracy

14. The manner and means by which the conspirators sought to accomplish
the objects and purposes of the conspiracy included, among other things, the
following:

15. It was a part of the conspiracy that one or more conspirators would and
did submit and cause to be submitted fraudulent PPP loan applications to
CenterState Bank and Customers Bank on behalf of Helly Tec LLC, HFSG LLC,
MMHFSG LLC, Goshawk Optical LLC, and Doggo Enterprises LLC (each a
“COMPANY,” and collectively, the “COMPANIES”).

16. It was further a part of the conspiracy that one or more conspirators
would and did knowingly include in the COMPANIES’ PPP loan applications
materially false and fraudulent representations and supporting documentation,
including:

a. False claims that a COMPANY had the average monthly payroll

expenses stated in the application, when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators then
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 6 of 9 PagelD 6

and there well knew, the COMPANY’s actual average monthly payroll expenses
were significantly lower, or entirely nonexistent.

b. False claims that a COMPANY had the number of employees
stated in the application, when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators then and there
well knew, the COMPANY’s actual number of employees was significantly lower, or
entirely nonexistent.

c. Fabricated documentation that purported to show a
COMPANY ’s annual sales revenue, when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators
then and there well knew, the COMPANY ’s actual annual sales revenue was
significantly lower, or entirely nonexistent.

d. Fabricated documentation that purported to list the names of
employees of a COMPANY and timeframes in which those employees worked for
the COMPANY, when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators then and there well
knew, some or all of the listed employees had not worked for the COMPANY during
the stated timeframes, if at all.

e. Fabricated documentation that purported to list the payments
made to employees of a COMPANY and the timeframes in which those payments
had been made, when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators then and there well
knew, some or all of the employees had not received the stated payments from the

COMPANY during the stated timeframes, if at all.
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 7 of 9 PagelD 7

f. A false certification thata COMPANY was in operation on
February 15, 2020, when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators then and there well
knew, the COMPANY had ceased operation before February 15, 2020.

g. A false certification that “[t]he funds will be used to retain
workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage interest payments, lease payments,
and utility payments, as specified under the Paycheck Protection Program Rule,”
when in truth and in fact, as the conspirators then and there well knew, the
conspirators intended to use the PPP loan proceeds for unauthorized purposes,
including to purchase FedEx routes for their personal enrichment.

h. A false certification that “the information provided in this
application and the information provided in all supporting documents and forms is
true and accurate in all material respects,” when in truth and in fact, as the
conspirators then and there well knew, the information provided in the PPP loan
application and supporting documentation and forms was not true and accurate in all
material respects.

17. It was further part of the conspiracy that one of more of the conspirators
obtained proceeds of PPP loans issued to a COMPANY as a result of a materially
false PPP loan application.

18. It was further part of the conspiracy that the conspirators knowingly
spent and attempted to spend those proceeds on numerous items that they knew were
not authorized under the PPP, including personal credit card expenses and FedEx

routes.
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 8 of 9 PagelD 8

19. It was further a part of the conspiracy that one or more conspirators
would and did perform acts and make statements to hide and conceal, and cause to
be hidden and concealed, the purpose of the scheme and the acts committed in
furtherance of the scheme.

All in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349.

FORFEITURE

1, The allegations contained in Count One of this Information are hereby
realleged and incorporated by reference for the purpose of alleging forfeitures
pursuant to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A).

2. Upon conviction of a violation of 18 USC. § 1349, the defendant shall
forfeit to the United States, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A), any property
constituting, or derived from, proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of
such violation.

3. The property to be forfeited includes, but is not limited to, the
following: (a) a money judgment in the amount of $632,000, which represent
proceeds of the offenses; (b) approximately $50,000 seized from Tannehill, Carmean
& McKenzie PLLC’s account at Trust Mark National Bank, which was being held
on behalf of Holly Urban and/or Hufer3 Inc.; and (c) approximately $67,845.66
seized from USAA Federal Savings Bank Account #7284-9 held in the name of
Tomas Ziupsnys and Holly Urban, which fund were proceeds obtained from the

bank fraud conspiracy.
Case 6:22-cr-00002-ACC-DCI Document1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 9 of 9 PagelD 9

4. 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;

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

provisions of 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated by 18 U.S.C. § 982(b)(1).

ROGER B. HANDBERG
United States Attorney

Emily C. L. Chang
Assistant United States Attorney

Thianys Rfvera Miranda
Assistant United States Attorney
Deputy Chief, Orlando Division


File and source

File

1-information.pdf

Size

609,963 bytes

SHA-256

f7386586f357325ee65c29d7a72234afa225b1f3fddef57df25921f45a646b33

Our copy

1-information.pdf

Original

archive.org