11712859602
11712859602
PLEA AGREEMENT
Pursuant to Rules 1 1(c)(1)(A) and(C)of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the
United States of America by its attorney, Jane E. Young, United States Attorney for the District
of New Hampshire, and the defendant, Pierre Rogers, and the defendant’s attorney, Diane Bass,
I'he defendant agrees to waive his right to have this matter presented to a grand jury and
plead guilty to a Superseding Information charging him with Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud
In exchange for the defendant’s guilty plea, the United States agrees to the sentencing
stipulations identified in Section 6 of this agreement. The United States also agrees to move to
dismiss all Counts with respect to the defendant in the underlying indictment when the defendant
is sentenced.
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349 provides, in pertinent part:
18 U.S.C. § 1349.
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 2 of 16
The defendant understands that the offense has the following elements, each of which the
First, that the agreement specified in the indictment, and not some other agreement or
agreements, existed between at least two people to commit bank fraud and wire fraud;
and
Paltern Criminal Jury Instruclionsfor the District Courts ofthe First Circuit, District ofMaine
Internet Site Edition, 2022 Revisions, Instructions 4.18.1349 and 4.18.371(1).'
https://www.med.uscouits.aov/sites/med/nics/crpi ilinks.pdf.
The underlying substantive offense of bank fraud, Title 18, United States Code, Section
(2) to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property
owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of
false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
shall be fined not more than $ 1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
The defendant understands that the offense has the following elements:
First, that there was a scheme as substantially charged in the indictment to defraud a
financial institution;
Second, that the defendant knowingly and willfully participated in this scheme with the
intent to defraud; and
Third, that the financial institution was federally insured or was a federal reserve bank or
a member of the federal reserve system.
Pattern Criminal Jury Instructionsfor the District Courts ofthe First Circuit, District ofMaine
Internet Site Edition, 2022 Revisions, Instruction 4.18.1344, available at
https://ww\v.med.uscouils.iiov/sites/med/nics/crpiilinks.pdf
' Proof of an overt act is not an element of conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 1349. See United Slates v.
/uWfl,789 F.3d I, 9-10 (1st Cir. 2015); accord United States v. Roy, 783 F.3d 418, 420-21 (2d Cir. 2015).
-2-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 3 of 16
The underlying substantive offense of wire fraud, Title 18, United States Code, Section
1343 provides:
The defendant understands that the offense has the following elements:
First, that there was a scheme, substantially as charged in the indictment, to obtain money
or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses;
Second, that the scheme to obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent
pretenses involved a false statement, assertion, half-truth or knowing concealment concerning a
material fact or matter:
Third, that the defendant knowingly and willfully participated in this scheme with the
intent to defraud; and
Fourth,that for the purpose of executing the scheme or in furtherance of the scheme, the
defendant caused an interstate wire communication to be used, or it was reasonably foreseeable
that for the purpose of executing the scheme or in furtherance of the scheme, an interstate wire
communication would be used, on or about the date alleged.
Pattern Criminal Jury Instructionsfor the District Courts ofthe First Circuit, District ofMaine
Internet Site Edition, 2021 Revisions, Instruction 4.18.1343,
https://www.med.iiscoiirts.izov/sites/med/l1les/crpiilinks.Ddf.
3. Offense Conduct.
The defendant stipulates and agrees that if this case proceeded to trial, the government
would introduce evidence of the following facts, which would prove the elements of the offense
TD Bank was a financial institution as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 20, the deposits of which
The defendant owned or controlled the companies called Monticello Transnational and
-3-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 4 of 16
Sunju. The defendant and his co-conspirator, Joshua Leavitt,jointly owned or controlled
multiple companies, including Puro Trader (d/b/a Yahyn), Puro Lounge, and Puro Group.
agency of the United States government that provides support to entrepreneurs and small
businesses.
In or around March 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(“CARES”) Act was enacted to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of
Americans suffering adverse economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES
Act established several new temporary programs and expanded existing programs, including
One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of forgivable
loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a program referred
To obtain a PPP loan, the authorized representative of a business was required to state the
business’s average monthly payroll expenses and number of employees. These figures were used
to calculate the amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the PPP.
A participating lender would then process the PPP loan application. If the PPP loan
application was approved, the participating lender funded the PPP loan using its own monies,
Between on or about April 6, 2020, and continuing through on or about January 21,2021,
the defendant agreed with Leavitt to provide false information to TD Bank in PPP loan
-4-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 5 of 16
applications. Leavitt prepared supporting documents, including purported tax filings, which
For example, on or about May 6, 2020, Leavitt submitted a $175,000 PPP loan
application and provided supporting documents to TD Bank for Puro Group. The application
claimed that Puro Group’s monthly payroll was $70,000 and that the company had six
employees. The defendant initialed, certified, and signed the application. The defendant knew
One of the documents was a false IRS Form 941, or quarterly tax return, for Q1 2020.
The document claimed that Puro Group had paid five employees $209,999.99 in Q1 2020 and
paid $27,600 in federal income tax that quarter. However, that document was never filed with
the IRS. The actual tax document filed with the IRS showed that Puro Group paid $48,255.53
to its employees during the entire calendar year of 2020, or approximately $4,000 per month.
Another supporting document was a purported “Payroll Summary” that showed five
employees earning $209,999.99 during Q1 2020. However, this “Payroll Summary” was
identical to another “Payroll Summary” that was submitted in connection with a different PPP
TD Bank granted the loan application. The defendant used $107,780 of the PPP loan
funds to purchase a 2011 Rolls Royce Ghost with a VIN ending in -0157.
The Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) program was another source of financial
assistance provided by the CARES Act. It provided low-interest financing to small businesses.
renters, and homeowners in regions affected by declared disasters. The EIDL program was
The CARES Act authorized the SBA to provide EIDLs to eligible small businesses
-5-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 6 of 16
experiencing substantial financial disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the
CARES Act authorized the SBA to issue advances of up to $10,000 to small businesses, known
as Economic Injui'y Disaster Grants (ElDGs). The amount of the advance was determined by
the number of employees the applicant certified having. The advances did not need to be
repaid.
To obtain an EIDL and/or EIDG, a qualifying business was required to apply to the SBA
and provide information about its operations, such as the number of employees and the entity’s
gross business revenues and cost of goods sold in the 12 months prior to January 31, 2020. The
amount of the loan, if approved, was determined based, in part, on the information provided
Any funds issued under an EIDL or EIDG were issued directly by the SBA. EIDL funds
could be used for payroll expenses, sick leave, production costs, and business obligations, such
Between on or about March 30, 2020, and continuing through on or about November 23,
2021, the defendant agreed with Leavitt to provide false information to the SBA in EIDL
applications.
application for Monticello Transnational that was received by an SBA server in the Des Moines,
Iowa, area. The defendant was the sole owner and CEO of the company. The defendant knew
that the application included false information about Monticello Transnational’s payroll and
earnings.
The application falsely claimed that Monticello Transnational’s gross revenues for the 12
months preceding January 31, 2020, was $75,000, that the cost of goods sold in that same time
-6-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 7 of 16
period was $3,000, and that the company had seven employees. Bank records show that
Monticello Transnational only had a few thousand dollars’ worth of deposits in 2019 and January
2020 and that there were no payments to employees. IRS records show that no tax filings were
submitted for Monticello Transnational for 2019 or the first quarter of 2020. The SBA relied on
the false representations in awarding a $29,000 EIDL and a $7,000 EIDG to Monticello
Transnational.
Overall, the intended loss in this scheme was at least $3.5 million.
The defendant understands that the penalties for the offense are:
E. In addition to the other penalties provided by law, the Court may order the
defendant to pay restitution to the victim(s) of the offense (18 U.S.C. § 3663 or §
3663A).
To facilitate the payment and collection of any restitution that may be ordered, the
defendant agrees that, upon request, he will provide the United States with a
-7-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 8 of 16
The defendant further agrees that, if restitution is ordered, it shall be due and
payable immediately after the judgment is entered and is subject to immediate
enforcement, in full, by the United Stales. If the Court imposes a schedule of
payments, the defendant agrees that the schedule of payments is a schedule of the
minimum payment due, and that the payment schedule does not prohibit or limit
the methods by which the United States may immediately enforce thejudgment in
full, including, but not limited to, the Treasury Offset Program.
The defendant understands that the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 applies in this case
and that the Court is required to consider the United Slates Sentencing Guidelines as advisory
guidelines. The defendant further understands that he has no right to withdraw from this Plea
Agreement if the applicable advisory guideline range or his sentence is other than he anticipated.
The defendant also understands that the United States and the United States Probation
Office shall:
A. Advise the Court of any additional, relevant facts that are presently known
or may subsequently come to their attention;
The defendant understands that the United States and the Probation Office may address
The defendant acknowledges that any estimate of the probable sentence or the probable
sentencing range under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines that he may have received from any
source is only a prediction and not a promise as to the actual sentencing range under the advisory
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. 1 1(c)(1)(C), the United States and the defendant stipulate and
(b) The defendant is jointly and severally liable for no less than $803,756.00
The parties intend the above stipulations to be “binding” under Fed. R. Crim. P.
11(c)(1)(C). By using the word binding the parties mean that if the Court will not accept the plea
agreement under Fed. R. Crim. P. 1 1(c)(3)(A), the plea agreement is null and void and the
The parties are free to make recommendations with respect to the terms of imprisonment,
fines, conditions of probation or supervised release, and any other penalties, requirements, and
conditions of sentencing as each party may deem lawful and appropriate, unless such
7. Acceptance of Responsibility.
The United States agrees that it will not oppose an appropriate reduction in the
defendant's adjusted offense level, under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines, based upon the
for the offense. The United States, however, may oppose any adjustment for acceptance of
A. Fails to admit a complete factual basis for the plea at the time he is
sentenced or at any other time;
-9-
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 10 of 16
B. Challenges the United States' offer of proof at any time after the plea is
entered;
E. Fails to give complete and accurate information about his financial status
to the Probation Office;
The defendant understands and agrees that he may not withdraw his guilty plea if, for any
of the reasons listed above, the United States does not recommend that he receive a reduction in
The defendant also understands and agrees that the Court is not required to reduce the
If the defendant’s offense level is sixteen or greater, and he has assisted the United States
in the investigation or prosecution of his own misconduct by timely notifying the United States
of his intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby permitting the United States to avoid preparing
for trial and permitting the United States and the Court to allocate their resources efficiently, the
United States will move, at or before sentencing, to decrease the defendant’s base offense level
- 10 -
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 11 of 16
I'he defendant understands that he has the right to be represented by an attorney at every
stage of the proceeding and, if necessary, one will be appointed to represent him. The defendant
A. To plead not guilty or to maintain that plea if it has already been made;
The defendant understands and agrees that by pleading guilty he waives and gives up the
foregoing rights and that upon the Court’s acceptance of his guilty plea, he will not be entitled to
a trial.
The defendant understands that if he pleads guilty, the Court may ask him questions
about the offense, and if he answers those questions falsely under oath, on the record, and in the
presence of counsel, his answers will be used against him in a prosecution for perjury or making
false statements.
A. Is entering into this Plea Agreement and is pleading guilty freely and voluntarily because
he is guilty;
B. Is entering into this Plea Agreement without reliance upon any promise or benefit of any
kind except as set forth in this Plea Agreement or revealed to the Court;
C. Is entering into this Plea Agreement without threats, force, intimidation, or coercion;
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 12 of 16
The defendant acknowledges and understands that this Plea Agreement binds only the
undersigned parties and cannot bind any other non-party federal, state or local authority. The
defendant also acknowledges that no representations have been made to him about any civil or
administrative consequences that may result from his guilty plea. The defendant understands
such matters are solely within the discretion of the specific non-party government agency
involved. The defendant further acknowledges that this Plea Agreement has been reached
without regard to any civil tax matters that may be pending or which may arise involving the
defendant.
The defendant understands that as a consequence of his guilty plea he will be adjudicated
guilty and may thereby be deprived of certain federal benefits and certain rights, such as the right
The defendant understands that, if he is not a citizen of the United States, his guilty plea
to the charged offense will likely result in him being subject to immigration proceedings and
removed from the United States by making him deportable, excludable, or inadmissible. 'I'he
defendant also understands that if he is a naturalized citizen, his guilty plea may result in ending
his naturalization, which would likely subject him to immigration proceedings and possible
removal from the United States. The defendant understands that the immigration consequences
of this plea will be imposed in a separate proceeding before the immigration authorities. The
- 12 -
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 13 of 16
defendant wants and agrees to plead guilty to the charged offense regardless of any immigration
consequences of this plea, even if this plea will cause his removal from the United States. The
defendant understands that he is bound by his guilty plea regardless of any immigration
consequences of the plea. Accordingly, the defendant waives any and all challenges to his guilty
plea and to his sentence based on any immigration consequences and agrees not to seek to
withdraw his guilty plea, or to file a direct appeal or any kind of collateral attack challenging his
guilty plea, conviction, or sentence, based on any immigration consequences of his guilty plea.
The defendant’s guilty plea, if accepted by the Court, will satisfy his federal criminal
liability in the District of New Hampshire arising from his participation in the conduct that forms
The defendant understands and agrees that, if after entering this Agreement, he fails
specifically to perform or fulfill completely each one of his obligations under this Agreement,
fails to appear for sentencing, or engages in any criminal activity prior to sentencing, he will
If the United States, in its sole discretion, and acting in good faith, determines that the
defendant committed or attempted to commit any further crimes, failed to appear for sentencing.
or has otherwise violated any provision of this Agreement, the United States will be released
from its obligations under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, any agreement it made
sentence within a specified range. The defendant also understands that he may not use his breach
of this Agreement as a reason to withdraw his guilty plea or as a basis to be released from his
guilty plea.
- 13 -
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 14 of 16
13. Waivers.
A. Appeal.
The defendant understands that he has the right to challenge his guilty plea and/or
sentence on direct appeal. By entering into this Plea Agreement the defendant knowingly and
1. His guilty plea and any other aspect of his conviction, including, but not
limited to, adverse rulings on pretrial suppression motion(s) or any other
adverse disposition of pretrial motions or issues; or claims challenging the
constitutionality of the statute of conviction; and
The defendant’s waiver of his rights does not operate to waive an appeal based upon new
legal principles enunciated in Supreme Court or First Circuit case law after the date of this Plea
Agreement that have retroactive effect; or on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel.
B. Collateral Review
The defendant understands that he may have the right to challenge his guilty plea and/or
entering into this Plea Agreement, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives his right to
collaterally challenge:
1. His guilty plea, except as provided below, and any other aspect of his
conviction, including, but not limited to, adverse rulings on pretrial
suppression motion(s) or any other adverse disposition of pretrial motions
or issues, or claims challenging the constitutionality of the statute of
conviction; and
The defendant’s waiver of his right to collateral review does not operate to waive a
collateral challenge to his guilty plea on the ground that it was involuntary or unknowing, or on
- 14 -
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 15 of 16
the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. The defendant’s waiver of his right to collateral
review also does not operate to waive a collateral challenge based on new legal principles
enunciated by in Supreme Court or First Circuit case law decided after the date of this Plea
The defendant hereby waives all rights, whether asserted directly or through a
representative, to request or receive from any department or agency of the United States any
records pertaining to the investigation or prosecution of the case(s) underlying this Plea
Agreement, including without limitation any records that may be sought under the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. §552, or the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. §522a.
Nothing in this Plea Agreement shall operate to waive the rights or obligations of the
The defendant acknowledges that no other promises, agreements, or conditions have been
entered into other than those set forth in this Plea Agreement or revealed to the Court, and none
will be entered into unless set forth in writing, signed by all parties, and submitted to the Court.
None of the terms of this Plea Agreement shall be binding on the United States until this
Plea Agreement is signed by the defendant and the defendant’s attorney and until it is signed by
the United States Attorney for the District of New Hampshire, or an Assistant United States
Attorney.
- 15 -
Case 1:22-cr-00074-PB Document 39 Filed 10/13/22 Page 16 of 16
The United States and the defendant understand and agree that if any provision of this
Plea Agreement is deemed invalid or unenforceable, then the entire Plea Agreement is null and
JANE E. YOUNG
United States Attorney
10/12/2022
Date: By:.
Alexander S. Chen
Special Assistant United States Attorney
MA Bar Association #698458
53 Pleasant St, 4th Floor
Concord, NH 03301
[email protected]
The defendant, Pierre Rogers, certifies that he has read thi^l 6-page Plea Agreement and
that he fully understands and accepts its terms. \
I have read and explained this 16-page Plea Agreemen ;he defendant, and he has
advised me that he understands and accepts its terms.
Date: 10/12/22
Diane Bass, Esquire
Attorney for Pierre Rogers
- 16 -