Information — United States v. Jane Batista (D.N.J.)
Summary
In this information (Crim. No. 24-, D.N.J.), filed after Jane Batista waived prosecution by indictment, the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey charges one count of wire fraud and one count of money laundering. It alleges that from around April 2020 through around August 2021 Batista, of Oradell, New Jersey, and Lake Worth, Florida, submitted at least seven falsified PPP applications for Batista, Batista's husband, Business-1 and Business-2, with fake IRS Forms 940 and 941. In one, Victim Lender-2 disbursed approximately $160,040 to Business-1 on a Form 941 claiming 10 employees and a payroll of $154,000. The information says Batista received a total of approximately $465,489. Count Two charges a transfer of approximately $15,000 on or about April 15, 2021, and the forfeiture allegation seeks $465,488.32.
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
Full text
2023R00058/ALW/RTM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : Hon.
:
v. : Crim. No. 24-
:
JANE BATISTA : 18 U.S.C. § 1343
: 18 U.S.C. § 1957
INFORMATION
The defendant having waived in open court prosecution by Indictment, the
United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey charges:
COUNT ONE
(Wire Fraud)
1. At all times relevant to this Information:
a. Defendant JANE BATISTA resided in Oradell, New Jersey, and
Lake Worth, Florida.
b. BATISTA owned and controlled various business entities,
including Business-1 and Business-2, located in Oradell, New Jersey.
c. Bank-1 was a financial institutional headquartered in McLean,
Virginia.
d. An Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Form Schedule C was a form
used by individuals to report income or loss from a business on their individual tax
returns.
e. An IRS Form 941 was a quarterly federal tax return that
employers were required to file with the IRS setting forth the total amount of wages
and other compensation subject to withholding, the total amount of payroll taxes
withheld by the employer, and the total tax deposits made to the IRS.
f. An IRS Form 940 was an annual federal tax return that
employers were required to file with the IRS setting forth, among other things, the
total amount of wages the employer paid.
Paycheck Protection Program
g. 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
to as the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). In or around April 2020, Congress
authorized over $300 billion in additional PPP funding. The PPP ended on May 31,
2021.
h. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required 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. In the loan application,
the small business was required to state, among other things, its: (a) average monthly
payroll expenses; and (b) number of employees. These figures were used to calculate
the amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the PPP. In
2
addition, businesses applying for a PPP loan had to provide documentation showing
their payroll expenses.
i. A PPP loan application had to be processed by a participating
lender. If the PPP loan application was approved, the participating lender funded
the PPP loan using its own money, which was 100% guaranteed by the U.S. 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 while processing the loan.
j. PPP loan proceeds could only be used by the business on certain
permissible expenses—payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The
PPP allowed the interest and principal on the PPP loan to be forgiven if the business
spent the loan proceeds on these eligible 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 Scheme to Defraud
2. From in or around April 2020 through in or around August 2021, in the
District of New Jersey and elsewhere, the defendant,
JANE BATISTA,
did knowingly and intentionally devise and intend to devise a scheme and artifice to
defraud victim lenders, and to obtain money and property by means of materially
false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, which scheme and
artifice was in substance as set forth below.
3
Goal of the Scheme to Defraud
3. The goal of the scheme was for BATISTA to enrich herself by
fraudulently obtaining and misusing federal COVID-19 emergency relief funds.
Manner and Means of the Scheme to Defraud
4. It was part of the scheme to defraud that:
a. BATISTA submitted or caused to be submitted at least seven
falsified and fraudulent PPP applications seeking federal COVID-19 emergency relief
money on behalf of herself, her husband, Business-1, and Business-2.
b. BATISTA’s fraudulent applications included false information
concerning, among other things, the applicant’s average monthly payroll and number
of employees, and fake supporting tax documents for an applicant, including IRS
Forms 940 and IRS Forms 941.
c. For example, on or about March 15, 2021, BATISTA submitted a
PPP loan application to a financing company (“Victim Lender-1”) in her capacity as a
sole proprietor requesting approximately $20,833 (“Application-1”). Application-1
contained materially false and fraudulent information, including a fabricated IRS
Form Schedule C. On or about April 8, 2021, based on BATISTA’s false and
fraudulent representations and omissions in Application-1, Victim Lender-1
disbursed approximately $20,833 in PPP funds to an account that BATISTA
controlled at Bank-1, resulting in an interstate wire transmission.
d. Similarly, on or about May 2, 2020, BATISTA caused to be
submitted a PPP loan application to a financing company (“Victim Lender-2”) on
behalf of Business-1 requesting approximately $160,040 (“Application-2”).
4
Application-2 included false and fraudulent information, including a fabricated copy
of Business-1’s purported IRS Form 941 for the first quarter of 2020, which falsely
represented that Business-1 had 10 employees and a payroll of $154,000. On or about
May 5, 2020, based on BATISTA’s false and fraudulent representations and
omissions in Application-2, Victim Lender-2 disbursed approximately $160,040 in
PPP funds to Business-1.
e. Similarly, on or about February 17, 2021, BATISTA submitted, or
caused to be submitted, a PPP loan application to a financing company (“Victim
Lender-3”) on behalf of Business-2 requesting approximately $77,748 (“Application-
3”). Application-3 included false and fraudulent information, including a fabricated
copy of Business-2’s purported IRS Form 940 for 2020, which falsely represented that
Business-2 paid approximately $277,192 in wages in 2020. On or about February 26,
2021, based on BATISTA’s false and fraudulent representations and omissions in
Application-3, Victim Lender-3 disbursed approximately $77,748 to Business-2.
f. As a result of the false and fraudulent PPP applications she
submitted, BATISTA received a total of approximately $465,489 in funds intended
for federal COVID-19 emergency relief.
Execution of the Scheme to Defraud
5. On or about March 15, 2021, in the District of New Jersey and
elsewhere, the defendant,
JANE BATISTA,
for the purpose of executing and attempting to execute the scheme described above,
did transmit and cause to be transmitted by means of wire communications in
5
interstate and foreign commerce certain writings, signs, signals, pictures, and
sounds, namely, the online submission of Application-1 to Victim Lender-1 from
Oradell, New Jersey.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.
6
COUNT TWO
(Money Laundering)
6. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1, 3, and 4 of Count One of this
Information are realleged here.
7. On or about April 15, 2021, in the District of New Jersey and elsewhere,
the defendant,
JANE BATISTA,
Did knowingly engage and attempt to engage in a monetary transaction by, through,
or to a financial institution, affecting interstate or foreign commerce, in criminally
derived property of a value greater than $10,000, that is a transfer of approximately
$15,000 from BATISTA’s account at Bank-1 to an account owned by another
individual at Bank-1, such property having been derived from a specified unlawful
activity, that is, wire fraud, contrary to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957(a).
7
FORFEITURE ALLEGATION AS TO COUNT ONE
Upon conviction of the offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1343, as charged in Count One of this Information, defendant JANE
BATISTA shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code,
Section 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any property,
real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the
commission of such offense, including, but not limited to, a sum of money equal to
$465,488.32, representing the proceeds of the offense charged in Count One of this
Information.
FORFEITURE ALLEGATION AS TO COUNT TWO
Upon conviction of the offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1957, as charged in Count Two of this Information, defendant JANE
BATISTA shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code,
Section 982(a)(1), all property, real and personal, involved in the money laundering
offense, and all property traceable to such property.
SUBSTITUTE ASSETS PROVISION
(Applicable to All Forfeiture Allegations)
If any of the above-described forfeitable property, as a result of any act or
omission of the defendant:
a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;
b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third person;
c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;
d. has been substantially diminished in value; or
8
e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be subdivided
without difficulty,
it is the intent of the United States, pursuant to Title 21, United States Code,
Section 853(p), as incorporated by Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c) and
Title 18, United States Code Section 982(b)(1), to seek forfeiture of any other property
of the defendant up to the value of the above forfeitable property.
______________________
PHILIP R. SELLINGER
United States Attorney
9
File and source
- File
- njd-2-24-cr-00633-information-doj-copy-f6-02338.pdf
- Size
- 88,839 bytes
- SHA-256
- fb8dbc17a27a84887acc511dea951819e2c8d803dd3a2f2d903a7448c47ac9bd
- Original
- No public link identified.