<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Wednesday, June 28, 2023<br />
 Missouri Man Arrested on Felony and Misdemeanor Charges For Actions During Jan. 6 Capitol Breach</p>
<h2>Defendant Accused of Joining Push Against Law Enforcement in Tunnel Entrance</h2>
<p> WASHINGTON — A Missouri man has been arrested on felony and misdemeanor charges related to his actions during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His actions and the actions of others disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election.</p>
<p> Kyle Kumer, 43, of Kansas City, Missouri, is charged in a criminal complaint filed in the District of Columbia with civil disorder, a felony charge, and misdemeanor charges of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, and impeding passage through the Capitol grounds or buildings.</p>
<p> Kumer was arrested in Kansas City and made his initial appearance today in the Western District of Missouri.</p>
<p> According to court documents, on Jan. 6, 2021, Kumer was identified as being present in the lower west terrace tunnel entrance to the Capitol building. At approximately 2:56 p.m., Kumer is accused of entering the tunnel and engaging with a crowd of rioters in a concerted “heave-ho” movement against the line of law enforcement officers protecting the entrance to the building.</p>
<p> At approximately 3:10 p.m., court documents say that rioters were being moved out of the tunnel by police officers, but Kumer remained. Later, rioters again returned to the tunnel, and Kumer is accused of joining in a second, concerted effort to push back against police officers protecting the entrance to the building. During this effort, Kumer used his back to push and encouraged other rioters to push by calling out, “Let’s go! C’mon! Let’s go!”</p>
<p> This case is being prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. Valuable assistance was provided by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Missouri.</p>
<p> This case is being investigated by the FBI’s Kansas City and Washington Field Offices, which identified Kumer as BOLO (“Be On the Look Out”) #126 on its seeking information photos. Valuable assistance was provided by the United States Capitol Police and the Metropolitan Police Department.</p>
<p> In the 29 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 1,000 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including nearly 350 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing. </p>
<p> Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.</p>
<p> A complaint is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.</p>
<p> Attachment(s): <img title="application/pdf" src="https://www.justice.gov/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png"/> <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/press-release/file/1588596/download" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Download Signed Kumer SOF_redacted</a>Topic(s): Violent CrimeComponent(s): <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-wdmo" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; Missouri, Western</a>Press Release Number: 23-362 </p>
<p> Updated June 28, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/missouri-man-arrested-felony-and-misdemeanor-charges-actions-during-jan-6-capitol-breac-0> Original Article </a></p>

Category Archives: Fraud News From World
A “Fraud News From World” directory is a collection of news articles about fraud and scams from around the world. These directories can be a valuable resource for staying informed about the latest scams and how to protect yourself from them. The directory typically includes information about the scam, such as the type of scam, the target audience, the location of the scam, and the date of the scam. It may also include information about how to protect yourself from the scam, such as how to identify a phishing email or how to report a scam to the authorities.
Indictment Charges Alleged Members of Drug Trafficking Organization in Drug, Gun and Money Laundering Charges
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 27, 2023<br />
 Indictment Charges Alleged Members of Drug Trafficking Organization in Drug, Gun and Money Laundering Charges </p>
<p>Kennedy Street Crew (KDY) Operated Open-Air Drug Markets in Kennedy Street Neighborhood, Scene of Increasing Violence, in Northwest Washington D.C.</p>
<p> WASHINGTON – This morning, law enforcement agents from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) arrested 12 alleged members of a violent drug trafficking organization (“DTO”), known as the “Kennedy Street Crew,” or “KDY,” on charges including conspiracy to commit drug trafficking, possession of firearms in furtherance of drug trafficking, possession of firearms by persons convicted of a crime, assault with a deadly weapon, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. In addition to the arrests, law enforcement seized multiple firearms and drugs.</p>
<p> The case was announced by U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, Interim Chief Ashan Benedict of the Metropolitan Police Department, DEA Special Agent in Charge Jarod Forget, of the Washington Division, ATF Special Agent in Charge Craig Kailimai, of the Washington Division, FBI Acting Special Agent in Charge Sarah Linden, of the Washington Field Office’s Criminal and Cyber Division, and IRS-Criminal Investigation Acting Special Agent in Charge Kareem A. Carter, of the Washington, D.C. Office.</p>
<p> According to the indictment, KDY members operated open-air drug markets in and around the 100-1200 blocks of Kennedy Street in Northwest Washington, D.C., as well as the surrounding streets. The named defendants are charged with conspiring to distribute several controlled substances, including fentanyl, cocaine base and marijuana, and utilizing firearms, including fully automatic weapons, to enforce and protect the crew’s territory, including through intimidation and acts of violence. The indictment further alleges that KDY crew members conspired to establish shell companies through which they launder the proceeds of their drug trafficking. Over the course of the investigation, law enforcement seized more than 40 firearms (including eight suspected machineguns).</p>
<p> “As alleged in the Indictment, the Kennedy Street Crew (KDY) operated over an 11-block stretch, trafficking in large amounts of drugs and firearms and possessing numerous firearms in furtherance of its operations,” said U.S. Attorney Graves. “Criminal organizations like this are a magnet for violence. My office, MPD, and our federal law enforcement partners are focused on identifying and rooting out these types of operations: whether it be Fentanyl poisonings or the violence that typically accompanies large-scale drug operations, these distribution networks present a substantial threat to our community.” </p>
<p> “These individuals were a part of a criminal enterprise that existed to disrupt the community through violence and illegal activity, and today’s operation is evidence that intelligence-led policing and effective criminal justice partnerships can lead to positive outcomes in the District of Columbia,” said MPD Interim Chief Benedict. “The residents and businesses along our Kennedy Street corridor are safer because of the meticulous investigative efforts by law enforcement who relentlessly protect every city neighborhood.” </p>
<p> “Our strong partnership with state and local law enforcement agencies allows us to hold violent gang members like these accountable for their actions,” said DEA Special Agent in Charge Forget. “Ultimately, our goal is to ensure the safety of the families in our local area. As part of our initiative Operation Overdrive, we are making a difference in our communities, reducing drug poisonings, cutting violent crime, and stopping violent drug traffickers in their tracks.”</p>
<p> In addition to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl, 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, and a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base, the indictment also charges various alleged members of the conspiracy with, among other charges, assault with a dangerous weapon; using, carrying, and possessing a firearm and/or machinegun during a drug trafficking offense; engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without a license; unlawful possession of a firearm by a person convicted of a crime; possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number; and conspiracy to commit money laundering. The indictment also includes a forfeiture allegation seeking all proceeds of the alleged crimes. A full list of defendants, along with their corresponding charges, is contained below.</p>
<p> “This investigation is the result of multiple law enforcement entities working cohesively towards one common goal. That goal is disrupting criminal organizations and protecting our communities from firearms related violence, and the illegal distribution of narcotics,” said ATF Special Agent in Charge Kailimai. “As seen by our combined efforts with our law enforcement partners and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, this collaboration has led to the arrest of many individuals that continuously and carelessly disrupt the peace that we should all enjoy. ATF will continue to partner with our local, state, and federal partners to ensure that people who violate conditions of firearm ownership be prosecuted and held accountable for their actions.”</p>
<p> “IRS-CI is proud to stand with our law enforcement partners to announce this indictment. The dismantling of the Kennedy Street Crew exemplifies our commitment to improve the quality of life in our community and our relentless fight against drug trafficking organizations,” said Acting IRS-CI Special Agent in Charge Carter. “IRS-CI is specially equipped to follow the complex <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/tag/financial-fraud/" title="financial" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="1023">financial</a> trail left by criminals, and we are dedicated to holding those accountable for crimes committed.”</p>
<p> The investigation of this case had the sponsorship and support of the federal Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF). OCDETF specializes in the investigation and prosecution of drug trafficking and money laundering organizations and related criminal enterprises.</p>
<p> This case is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department, the DEA’s Washington Division, ATF’s Washington Field Division, with assistance from FBI’s Washington Field Office, and the IRS-Criminal Investigation Washington, D.C. Office. It is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Matthew W. Kinskey and Sitara Witanachchi, of the of the Violence Reduction and Trafficking Offenses Section of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. Valuable assistance was provided by former Special Assistant United States Attorney Brian Lynch.</p>
<p>DEFENDANTS</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p>NAME</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>AGE</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>CHARGES</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Kenneth Ademola Olugbenga</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>27</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute 100 Kilograms or More of Marijuana, a Mixture and Substance Containing a Detectable Amount of Fentanyl, and a Mixture and Substance Containing a Detectable Amount of Cocaine Base;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana;</p>
<p>Using, Carrying, and Possessing a Firearm During a Drug Trafficking Offense;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Person Convicted of a Crime Punishable by Imprisonment Exceeding One Year;</p>
<p>Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Khali Ahmed Brown, also known as “Migo Lee”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>22</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute 100 Kilograms or More of Marijuana, and 400 Grams or More of Fentanyl;</p>
<p>Assault with a Dangerous Weapon and Aiding and Abetting;</p>
<p>Possession with Intent to Distribute Fentanyl;</p>
<p>Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana;</p>
<p>Using, Carrying, and Possessing a Machinegun During a Drug Trafficking Offense;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession of a Machinegun; Possession of a Firearm with an Obliterated Serial Number</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Miasiah Jamal Brown, also known as “Michael Jamal Crawford”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>21</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, and a Mixture and Substance Containing a Detectable Amount of Cocaine Base;</p>
<p>Using, Carrying, and Possessing a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Offense</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Tristan Miles Ware, also known as “Greedy”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>23</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana;</p>
<p>Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Person Convicted of a Crime Punishable by Imprisonment Exceeding One Year;</p>
<p>Using, Carrying, and Possessing a Firearm During a Drug Trafficking</p>
<p>Offense</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Herman Eric-Bibmin Signou, also known as “Herman Signour”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>23</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute One Hundred Kilograms of More of Marijuana</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Cameron Xavier Reid</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>26</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute One Hundred Kilograms of More of Marijuana</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Aaron Deandre Mercer, also known as “Curby,”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>27</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, 400 Grams or More of Fentanyl, and a Mixture and Substance Containing a Detectable Amount of Cocaine</p>
<p>Base;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession with Intent to Distribute 40 Grams or More of Fentanyl</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>David Penn, also known as “Turtle”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, 40 Grams or Fentanyl, and a Mixture and Substance Containing a Detectable Amount of Cocaine</p>
<p>Base;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession with Intent to Distribute 40 Grams or More of Fentanyl;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana;</p>
<p>Using, Carrying, and Possessing a Machinegun in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Offense;</p>
<p>Using, Carrying, and Possessing a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Offense;</p>
<p>Engaging in the Business of Dealing in Firearms without a License;</p>
<p>Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Person Convicted of a Crime Punishable by Imprisonment for a Term Exceeding One Year</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Ronald Lynn Dorsey, also known as “Ron G”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>29</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana and a Mixture and Substance</p>
<p>Containing a Detectable Amount of Cocaine Base;</p>
<p>Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Antonio Reginald Bailey, also known as “Boy Boy,” also known as “Fellow King”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>22</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Anthony Trayon Bailey, also known as “Fat Ant,” also known as “Bizzle”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>27</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Angel Enrique Suncar, also known as “Coqui”</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>29</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana and a Mixture and Substance Containing Fentanyl</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p> Defendant Cameron Reid is from Falmouth, VA; all remaining defendants are from Washington, D.C.</p>
<p> An indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.</p>
<p> Attachment(s): <img title="application/pdf" src="https://www.justice.gov/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png"/> <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/press-release/file/1588521/download" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Download kdy_indictment_redacted.pdf</a>Topic(s): Violent CrimeDrug TraffickingComponent(s): <a href="http://www.atf.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/dea/index.shtml" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)</a><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a>Press Release Number: 23-356 </p>
<p> Updated June 27, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/indictment-charges-alleged-members-drug-trafficking-organization-drug-gun-and-money> Original Article </a></p>

District of Columbia Woman Found Guilty in Scheme to Steal Money From Non-Profit She Was Entrusted to Run
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 27, 2023<br />
 District of Columbia Woman Found Guilty in Scheme to Steal Money From Non-Profit She Was Entrusted to Run</p>
<p> WASHINGTON – Rowena Joyce Scott, 70, of the District of Columbia, was convicted today of wire fraud, credit card fraud, filing false tax returns, and failing to file tax returns, in connection with a scheme to steal and embezzle money from the non-profit corporation she was entrusted to run for the benefit of some of the District’s economically disadvantaged residents.</p>
<p> The verdict was announced by U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Kareem Carter, of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Washington D.C. Office and Chief John Fowler of the DC Office of Tax and Revenue Criminal Investigation Division. A sentencing hearing is scheduled for October 18, 2023.</p>
<p> The offense of wire fraud carries a statutory maximum of 20 years in prison. The offense of filing a false income tax return carries a statutory maximum of 3 years in prison. The offense of credit card fraud carries a statutory maximum of 10 years. The offense of willful failure to file tax returns carries a statutory maximum of one year. All the offenses also carry <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/tag/financial-fraud/" title="financial" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="1021">financial</a> penalties. </p>
<p> According to evidence presented in court, from approximately January 2010 through May 2014, Scott served as the president of the board of directors and manager of Park Southern Neighborhood Corporation (“PSNC”), a non-profit, non-member corporation that owned and operated the Park Southern apartment complex in Southeast Washington, D.C. Instead of serving PSNC’s charitable mission – of providing adequate, safe, affordable housing for the District’s underhoused and underprivileged residents – Scott engaged in a scheme through which she embezzled at least $125,000 from the organization’s coffers and used nearly $30,000 in additional funds to make purely personal, unauthorized purchases from third-party vendors. All the while, Scott collected $260,000 in “salary” (about $60,000 per year), lived in the building rent-free, and used the property’s common rooms, free of charge, to operate her own ministry. Scott failed to report all of the income she received from PSNC – legitimate or otherwise – for tax purposes. Meanwhile, under her watch, the PSNC failed to finish renovations for Americans-with- Disabilities-Act compliant units and failed to make <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/category/loans/" title="loan" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="326">loan</a> payments to the District.</p>
<p> This case was investigated by IRS-CID, the DC Office of Tax and Revenue. Assistant U.S. Attorney Kate Rakoczy, and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Lallas. It was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Brian Kelly and Diane Lucas, and Paralegal Specialist Sona Chaturvedi.</p>
<p> Topic(s): Financial FraudComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a>Press Release Number: 23-361 </p>
<p> Updated June 28, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/district-columbia-woman-found-guilty-scheme-steal-money-non-profit-she-was-entrusted-run> Original Article </a></p>

District of Columbia Man Sentenced to 60 Months in Prison for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 27, 2023<br />
 District of Columbia Man Sentenced to 60 Months in Prison for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm</p>
<h2>Defendant Admitted to Possessing Firearms in Connection to Drug Distribution</h2>
<p> WASHINGTON – Jimmy Martez Ellis, 30, of Washington, D.C., was sentenced on June 26, 2023, to 60 months in federal prison for the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition.</p>
<p> The announcement was made by U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Sarah Linden, of the FBI Washington Field Office Criminal and Cyber Division, and Special Agent in Charge Craig B. Kailimai, of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Washington Division.</p>
<p> Ellis, who utilized the street nicknames “Big Oso” and “Jim Bob” pleaded guilty on March 8, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, to one count of unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon. As part of his plea agreement, Ellis admitted that he was arrested on April 19, 2020, in possession of a loaded .40 caliber handgun and that he was arrested again on August 6, 2021, in possession of a loaded .38 caliber handgun. Ellis admitted that, as a convicted felon, he was not legally permitted to possess either handgun, and further admitted that he possessed the firearms in connection to another felony crime – namely the distribution and possession with the intent to distribute controlled substances. </p>
<p> Ellis was sentenced by the Honorable Tanya S. Chutkan. Following completion of his prison term, Ellis will be placed on three years of supervised release.</p>
<p> In announcing the sentence, U.S. Attorney Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Linden, and Special Agent in Charge Kailimai, commended the work of those who investigated the case from the FBI and ATF. They also expressed appreciation to those who worked on the case from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, including Assistant U.S. Attorney James B. Nelson who investigated and prosecuted the case.</p>
<p> Topic(s): Firearms OffensesComponent(s): <a href="http://www.atf.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)</a><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a>Press Release Number: 23-360 </p>
<p> Updated June 27, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/district-columbia-man-sentenced-60-months-prison-unlawful-possession-firearm> Original Article </a></p>

District of Columbia Man Sentenced to 70 Months in Prison For Conspiracy to Distribute Narcotics and Use Firearms
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 27, 2023<br />
 District of Columbia Man Sentenced to 70 Months in Prison For Conspiracy to Distribute Narcotics and Use Firearms</p>
<h2>Defendant Admitted to Committing Violence on behalf of a ";Street Crew";</h2>
<p> WASHINGTON – Trevon Fairfax, 28, of Rockville, Maryland, was sentenced today to 70 months in federal prison for his role in an ongoing conspiracy to distribute narcotics and a related conspiracy to possess firearms in furtherance of drug trafficking.</p>
<p> The announcement was made by U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Sarah Linden, of the FBI Washington Field Office’s Criminal and Cyber Division, Special Agent in Charge Craig B. Kailimai, of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Washington Division, and Interim Chief Ashan Benedict, of the Metropolitan Police Department.</p>
<p> Fairfax is one of more than a dozen individuals arrested as part of a joint FBI/ATF investigation which resulted in the seizure of more than 34 pounds of marijuana, 16 firearms, and more than $270,000 in cash.</p>
<p> Fairfax, who utilized the street nickname “Trizz,” pleaded guilty on October 21, 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, to one count of conspiracy to distribute more than 100 kilograms of marijuana, as well as oxycodone and codeine, and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. As part of his plea agreement, Fairfax admitted to participating in a separate conspiracy to use, carry, and possess firearms, and further admitted to discharging a firearm in defense of the co-conspirators’ drug dealing territory. Fairfax was sentenced by the Honorable Amy Berman Jackson. Following completion of his prison term, Fairfax will be placed on four years of supervised release.</p>
<p> According to the government’s evidence, beginning in approximately June 2018, and continuing through April 2021, Fairfax and his co-conspirators maintained drug dealing territory on Trenton Place SE in the Congress Heights neighborhood of Washington, D.C. – a territory they defended by carrying, and discharging, firearms at perceived rivals. As part of his role in the conspiracy, Fairfax distributed marijuana in bulk quantities and served as an armed defender of the co-conspirators’ drug dealing territory. Fairfax admitted that, on April 12, 2020, he fired a 9mm handgun at an SUV driving through the co-conspirators’ territory while another co-conspirator also fired at that vehicle. The driver of that vehicle sustained a gunshot wound and crashed his vehicle, but was able to escape on foot. Fairfax was arrested on April 22, 2021, and has been detained ever since.</p>
<p> In announcing the sentence, U.S. Attorney Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Linden, Special Agent in Charge Kailimai, and Interim Chief Benedict commended the work of those who investigated the case from the FBI, ATF, and MPD. They also expressed appreciation to those who worked on the case from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, including Assistant U.S. Attorney James B. Nelson who investigated and prosecuted the case.</p>
<p> Topic(s): Drug TraffickingFirearms OffensesComponent(s): <a href="http://www.atf.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)</a><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a>Press Release Number: 23-359 </p>
<p> Updated June 27, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/district-columbia-man-sentenced-70-months-prison-conspiracy-distribute-narcotics-and-us-1> Original Article </a></p>

District of Columbia Man Sentenced to 60 Months in Prison for Distribution of Marijuana and Oxycodone
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 27, 2023<br />
 District of Columbia Man Sentenced to 60 Months in Prison for Distribution of Marijuana and Oxycodone</p>
<h2>Defendant Admitted to Possessing Firearms as Part of Charged Conspiracy</h2>
<p> WASHINGTON – Kiyon Boyd, 23, of Washington, D.C., was sentenced today to 60 months in federal prison for his role in an ongoing conspiracy to distribute narcotics in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere</p>
<p> The announcement was made by U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Sarah Linden, of the FBI Washington Field Office’s Criminal and Cyber Division, and Interim Chief Ashan Benedict, of the Metropolitan Police Department.</p>
<p> Boyd, who utilized the street nickname “Workey,” pleaded guilty on April 7, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, to one count of conspiracy to marijuana and oxycodone, and two counts of possession with the intent to distribute marijuana. As part of his plea agreement, Boyd admitted that he distributed, or conspired to distribute, between 80 and 100 kilograms of marijuana. Boyd also admitted that firearms were used or possessed as part of the drug dealing conspiracy. Boyd was sentenced by the Honorable Beryl A. Howell. Following completion of his prison term, Boyd will be placed on three years of supervised release.</p>
<p> In announcing the sentence, U.S. Attorney Graves, Acting Special Agent in Charge Linden, and Interim Chief Benedict commended the work of those who investigated the case from the FBI, ATF, and MPD. They also expressed appreciation to those who worked on the case from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, including Assistant U.S. Attorney James B. Nelson who investigated and prosecuted the case.</p>
<p> Topic(s): Drug TraffickingFirearms OffensesComponent(s): <a href="http://www.atf.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)</a><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a>Press Release Number: 23-358 </p>
<p> Updated June 27, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/district-columbia-man-sentenced-60-months-prison-distribution-marijuana-and-oxycodone> Original Article </a></p>

Alabama Man Pleads Guilty to Assaulting Law Enforcement During Jan. 6 Capitol Breach
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 27, 2023<br />
 Alabama Man Pleads Guilty to Assaulting Law Enforcement During Jan. 6 Capitol Breach</p>
<h2>Defendant Pulled Police Officer Down a Flight of Stairs</h2>
<p> WASHINGTON – An Alabama man pleaded guilty on Monday, June 26, 2023, to a felony charge related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His actions and the actions of others disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election.</p>
<p> Bobby Wayne Russell, 49, of Falkville, Alabama, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia to one count of Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers and Aiding and Abetting, a felony offense. U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth scheduled a sentencing hearing for November 17, 2023.</p>
<p> According to court documents, on Jan. 6, 2021, Russell was among rioters confronting officers at a line of bike rack barricades on the southwest side of the Capitol grounds. Russell resisted officers’ efforts to get him to back away from the barricade. He held a section of bike rack pressed between his upper arm and side, clinging to it despite being sprayed with OC spray. When the barricade broke apart due to the involvement of other rioters, Russell grabbed the jacket of a Metropolitan Police Department officer, pulling the officer down with him as he fell headlong down a short flight of stairs.</p>
<p> Later that day, court documents say that at approximately 4:20 pm, law enforcement officers formed a line and attempted to clear the area near the Senate wing doors. Russell refused orders to leave the area and pushed his back and buttocks into the riot shields of several officers. He then turned around to face one officer and declared, ““There’s more of us than you guys, you’re gonna lose.”</p>
<p> The charge of Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers and Aiding and Abetting carries a statutory maximum sentence of eight years in prison. A federal court judge will determine the appropriate sentence after considering all factors and the U.S. Sentencing guidelines. All charges carry potential <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/tag/financial-fraud/" title="financial" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="1022">financial</a> penalties.</p>
<p> The case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Alabama.</p>
<p> The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Birmingham Field Office and Washington Field Office, which identified Russell as #492 on its seeking information photos. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Capitol Police and the Metropolitan Police Department.</p>
<p> In the 29 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 1,000 individuals have been charged in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including nearly 350 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.</p>
<p> Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.</p>
<p> Topic(s): Violent CrimeComponent(s): <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndal" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; Alabama, Northern</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; District of Columbia</a>Press Release Number: 23-357 </p>
<p> Updated June 27, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/alabama-man-pleads-guilty-assaulting-law-enforcement-during-jan-6-capitol-breach> Original Article </a></p>

Federal Jury Convicts Three Defendants of Interstate Stalking of Chinese Nationals in the United States and Two Defendants of Acting or Conspiring to Act on Behalf of the People’s Republic of China
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 20, 2023<br />
 Federal Jury Convicts Three Defendants of Interstate Stalking of Chinese Nationals in the United States and Two Defendants of Acting or Conspiring to Act on Behalf of the People’s Republic of China</p>
<h2>Retired NYPD Sergeant and Co-Conspirators are First Defendants Convicted After a U.S. Trial in Connection with PRC’s Repatriation Program “Operation Fox Hunt”</h2>
<p>Earlier today, a federal jury in Brooklyn, New York, convicted three defendants on multiple counts of a superseding indictment charging them with acting and conspiring to act in the United States as illegal agents of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), without prior notification to the Attorney General. </p>
<p>Michael McMahon, 55, of Mahwah, New Jersey, was convicted of acting as an illegal agent of the PRC, conspiracy to commit interstate stalking and interstate stalking; Congying Zheng, 27, of Brooklyn, was convicted of conspiracy to commit interstate stalking and interstate stalking; and Zhu Yong aka Jason Zhu, 66, of Queens, New York, was convicted of conspiracy to act as an illegal agent of the PRC, acting as an illegal agent of the PRC, conspiracy to commit interstate stalking and interstate stalking.</p>
<p>According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, McMahon – a retired NYPD sergeant working as a private investigator – and Zhu knowingly acted at the direction of the PRC government officials to conduct surveillance and engage in a campaign to harass, stalk and coerce certain residents of the United States to return to the PRC as part of a global and extralegal repatriation effort known as “Operation Fox Hunt.” Zheng engaged in interstate stalking of the same victims, leaving a threatening note at their residence. </p>
<p>Today’s verdict follows a three-week trial before U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen. McMahon faces up to 20 years in prison, Zhu faces up to 25 years in prison, and Zheng faces up to 10 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.</p>
<p>“The defendants engaged in a campaign of harassment and coercion on behalf of the PRC to force the victim’s repatriation to China from the United States, including by threatening family members,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. “The Department of Justice will hold accountable those who would help repressive regimes violate the fundamental freedoms of people in the United States.”</p>
<p>“The jury’s verdict confirms that defendants McMahon and Zhu knowingly acted at the direction of a hostile foreign state to harass, intimidate and attempt to cause the involuntary return of a resident of the New York metropolitan area to the People’s Republic of China, and that defendant Zheng harassed and intimidated that same person and his family,” said U.S. Attorney Breon Peace for the Eastern District of New York. “It is particularly troubling that defendant Michael McMahon, a former sergeant in the New York City Police Department, engaged in surveillance, harassment, and stalking on behalf of a foreign power for money. We will remain steadfast in exposing and undermining efforts by the Chinese government to reach across our border and perpetrate transnational repression schemes targeting victims in the United States in violation of our laws.”</p>
<p>“The conviction of these three defendants – including a retired NYPD sergeant – is yet another powerful reminder of the Chinese government’s ongoing, pervasive, and illegal behavior here in the United States,” said Assistant Director Suzanne Turner of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. “At the direction of the PRC’s Ministry of Public Security, the defendants engaged in increasingly egregious efforts at repression, from stalking to outright threats and intimidation tactics undertaken at the victim’s family home. This will not be tolerated within our borders, plain and simple. If you or someone you know have been targeted in this manner, we urge you to contact the FBI – and to all those engaging in such repression tactics, stand forewarned.”</p>
<p>As proven at trial, between approximately 2016 and 2019, the defendants participated in an international campaign with members of the PRC government as part of “Operation Fox Hunt” to threaten, harass, surveil and intimidate John Doe #1 and his family, in order to force John Doe #1 and his wife, Jane Doe #1, to return to the PRC. In or around 2015, the PRC government caused the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), an inter-governmental law enforcement organization, to issue “Red Notices” for John Doe #1 and Jane Doe #1, alleging that both persons were wanted by the PRC government on corruption-related charges.</p>
<p>Zhu hired McMahon who obtained detailed information about John Doe #1, his wife, and his daughter from a law enforcement database and other government databases, then reported back to Zhu and others, including a PRC police officer, what he had learned. McMahon also conducted surveillance outside the New Jersey home of John Doe #1’s sister-in-law and provided Zhu and PRC officials with detailed reports of what he had observed. The operation was supervised and directed by several PRC officials, including co-conspirators Hu Ji, a PRC police officer with the Wuhan Public Security Bureau and Tu Lan, a PRC prosecutor with the Wuhan Procuratorate.</p>
<p>In April 2017, Tu Lan and Hu Ji transported John Doe #1’s then-82-year-old father from the PRC to the New Jersey home of John Doe #1’s sister-in-law to attempt to convince John Doe #1 to return to the PRC. The testimony established that John Doe #1’s father was brought by a PRC doctor and charged co-conspirator, Li Minjun, and that while John Doe #1’s father was in the United States, his daughter was threatened with jailing in the PRC. A co-conspirator conducted surveillance of the home during the visit, wearing night-vision goggles provided by the PRC doctor and the PRC prosecutor. McMahon tailed John Doe #1 from the meeting with his elderly father, back to his home, and provided John Doe #1’s address – which was previously unknown – to the PRC operatives.</p>
<p>In October 2016 and April 2017, McMahon emailed himself a China Daily News article titled “Interpol Launches Global Dragnet for 100 Chinese Fugitives,” which stated, “Amid the nation’s intensifying antigraft campaign, arrest warrants were issued by Interpol China for former State employees and others suspected of a wide range of corrupt practices. China Daily was authorized by the Chinese justice authorities to publish the information below.” The article provided a list of photographs and identifying information about Operation Fox Hunt targets by the PRC government, including those of John Doe #1 and Jane Doe #1.</p>
<p>On Sept. 4, 2018, Zheng drove to the New Jersey residence of John Doe #1 and Jane Doe #1 and pounded on the front door. He and a co-conspirator attempted to force open the door to the residence, then left a note that stated “If you are willing to go back to the mainland and spend 10 years in prison, your wife and children will be all right. That’s the end of this matter!” </p>
<p>Previously, three other defendants pleaded guilty in connection with their roles in the PRC-directed harassment and intimidation campaign.</p>
<p>Zebin pleaded guilty in March 2022 to interstate stalking conspiracy and is awaiting sentencing. Hongru Jin pleaded guilty in June 2021 to conspiring to act as an illegal agent of the PRC and interstate stalking conspiracy and is awaiting sentencing. Tu Lan, Hu Ji and Li Minjun are fugitives.</p>
<p>The FBI New York Field Office investigated the case with valuable assistance provided by the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service.</p>
<p>Assistant U.S. Attorneys Craig R. Heeren, Meredith A. Arfa and Irisa Chen for the Eastern District of New York and Trial Attorney Christine A. Bonomo of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section are in charge of the prosecution, with valuable assistance provided by Paralegal Specialist Mary Clare McMahon. </p>
<p> Topic(s): Countering Nation-State ThreatsCounterintelligenceComponent(s): <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="https://www.justice.gov/nsd" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">National Security Division (NSD)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-edny" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; New York, Eastern</a>Press Release Number: 23-680 </p>
<p> Updated June 20, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-jury-convicts-three-defendants-interstate-stalking-chinese-nationals-united-states> Original Article </a></p>

Gerard R. Vetter Appointed Acting U.S. Trustee for Maryland, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 20, 2023<br />
 Gerard R. Vetter Appointed Acting U.S. Trustee for Maryland, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia</p>
<p>Gerard R. Vetter has been appointed by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland as the Acting U.S. Trustee for Maryland, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia and for the District of Columbia (Region 4) effective July 1, the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees announced today. Vetter replaces John P. Fitzgerald III, who is retiring after 43 years of dedicated service to the department, including the last four years as the Acting U.S. Trustee in Region 4. Under 28 U.S.C. § 585(a), the Attorney General may fill U.S. Trustee vacancies by appointing an Acting U.S. Trustee. </p>
<p>Vetter joined the U.S. Trustee Program (USTP) in 2010 as the Assistant U.S. Trustee in charge of the Greenbelt, Maryland, office of Region 4, where he served for four years before transferring to become the Assistant U.S. Trustee in the Baltimore office. He was the Region’s Creditor Enforcement Coordinator for many years and has been involved in supporting broader USTP efforts as a member of its Private Trustee Working Group and through service on peer evaluation teams. Before joining the USTP, Vetter was a chapter 13 trustee in the District of Maryland from 2004 to 2010 and prior to that was in private practice. He received his bachelor’s degree in public and international affairs cum laude from Princeton University and his Juris Doctorate from The George Washington University School of Law. </p>
<p>The USTP is the component of the Justice Department that protects the integrity of the bankruptcy system by overseeing case administration and litigating to enforce the bankruptcy laws. The USTP has 21 regions and 90 field office locations. Region 4 has offices in Baltimore and Greenbelt, Maryland; Columbia, South Carolina; Alexandria, Norfolk, Richmond, and Roanoke, Virginia; and Charleston, West Virginia. </p>
<p> Topic(s): BankruptcyComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/ust/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">U.S. Trustee Program</a>Press Release Number: 23-681 </p>
<p> Updated June 20, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/gerard-r-vetter-appointed-acting-us-trustee-maryland-south-carolina-virginia-west-virginia> Original Article </a></p>

Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter Delivers Keynote Address at the Brookings Institution’s Center on Regulation and Markets Event “Promoting Competition in Banking”
<p><strong>Merger Enforcement Sixty Years After Philadelphia National Bank</strong></p>
<p><em><strong>Remarks as Prepared for Delivery</strong></em></p>
<p>Thank you, Aaron, for that kind introduction. And thank you to Brookings for hosting this event. Sixty years ago this week, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in United States v. Philadelphia National Bank.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn1" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[1]</a> Today, I would like to discuss the enduring impact of this landmark case.</p>
<p>Philadelphia National Bank is well known in banking circles for recognizing the essential role that the antitrust laws have in protecting competition in the banking sector. But the legacy of Philadelphia National Bank is much broader: it is a foundational decision that has paved the way for antitrust merger enforcement across all industries. As we revise our general Merger Guidelines, Philadelphia National Bank looms large, and its impact on antitrust merger law is enduring and undeniable for enforcement agencies and for courts.</p>
<p>As we reflect on the legacy of Philadelphia National Bank, I hope we can all agree that bank competition is critically important for all Americans. Bank competition affects the interest you earn on your savings account, the monthly payment on your <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/category/mortgage/" title="mortgage" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="146">mortgage</a> or car loan, the fees you pay to withdraw cash from an ATM, the variety of financial products you can choose from, and whether your business can get an affordable loan. Simply put: bank competition affects people’s pocketbooks and their daily lives.</p>
<p>Recognizing the importance of competition in banking, President Biden has encouraged the Department of Justice and the federal banking agencies to revitalize bank merger oversight to “ensure Americans have choices among financial institutions and to guard against excessive market power.”<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn2" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[2]</a></p>
<p>The time is indeed ripe for us to re-examine how we assess bank mergers under the statutory framework that Congress has enacted. The Department of Justice and the banking agencies issued the current Bank Merger Guidelines in 1995.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn3" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[3]</a> Much has changed since then, as we can all see from our own personal experiences. The world today – including the banking system – is radically different than it was in 1995. With the popularization of interstate banking, <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/tag/financial-fraud/" title="financial" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="1017">financial</a> conglomeration, online and mobile banking, and the digital transformation of our economy, the banking system of today bears little resemblance to the banking system of three decades ago.</p>
<p>Against this backdrop, it is appropriate for us to reassess whether the prevailing approach to bank merger enforcement is fit for purpose given current market realities. Asking whether the factual and economic assumptions underlying the 1995 Guidelines are adequate to measure and assess the many different dimensions of competition that exist today is the responsible course of action.</p>
<p>Of course, I would be remiss if I did not address the elephant in the room. We are examining bank merger policy against the backdrop of an industry that has experienced some recent turmoil. There are many considerations relevant to bank merger policy. I will limit my comments today to the narrow but important question of how best to apply the antitrust laws to competition in the banking space, with an eye toward preserving the benefits of competition. Broader considerations regarding bank merger regulation is better left to the expert bank regulators.</p>
<p>Today, I will discuss why bank competition is essential, how bank competition has evolved over time, and how the Antitrust Division will fulfill its statutory obligation to protect competition in the banking sector going forward. In keeping with our celebration of Philadelphia National Bank, I will also discuss the impact of this seminal case on antitrust enforcement more broadly.</p>
<p>In 1961, the Department of Justice sued to block the merger of the second- and third-largest banks in Philadelphia. On June 17, 1963, the Supreme Court sided with the DOJ, holding that the merger violated section 7 of the Clayton Act. In its decision, the Supreme Court held that certain changes in market structure alone can create a presumption that a merger may substantially lessen competition.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn4" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[4]</a> In doing so, the Court underscored that a fundamental purpose of the Clayton Act was, among other things, to arrest trends toward concentration in their incipiency.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn5" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[5]</a></p>
<p>Philadelphia National Bank has made an indelible mark on merger enforcement generally. In its decision, the Court acknowledged that certain mergers are so clearly likely to lessen competition that they must be prohibited in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn6" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[6]</a> Courts have closely followed this presumption, simplifying the test of presumptive illegality for certain mergers and allowing decisionmakers to cut to the heart of the merger inquiry.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn7" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[7]</a> Though Philadelphia National Bank is most cited for its articulation of this presumption, the Court also set forth numerous other key principles of antitrust merger enforcement that remain lodestars today. </p>
<p>Philadelphia National Bank’s holdings are still binding.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn8" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[8]</a> The Supreme Court has not since revisited or criticized these holdings, and the basis for the structural presumption in merger review is even stronger today than it was in 1963 and is cited consistently and authoritatively by courts throughout the country.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn9" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[9]</a> </p>
<p>60 years on, Philadelphia National Bank has stood the test of time. Like its classmates from the 1963 term &#8211; Gideon v. Wainwright and Brady v. Maryland &#8211; Philadelphia National Bank is a seminal decision in its area of law.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn10" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[10]</a> That is true notwithstanding that much has changed in our understanding of economics and in the market realities we confront in our cases. When we evaluate precedent in antitrust, we distinguish the legal holdings from the analytical tools that we use to assess facts in any particular case or industry. As law enforcers, our job at the Antitrust Division is to apply those legal holdings in a manner consistent with modern tools and the realities of our markets as we find them today. </p>
<p>Of course, Philadelphia National Bank is uniquely relevant to banking. Although it may seem hard to believe today, for much of the 20th century it was widely assumed that banks were exempt from the antitrust laws. Philadelphia National Bank changed that assumption and firmly established that banking is within the purview of federal antitrust law.</p>
<p>Philadelphia National Bank emphasized the importance of competition in banking because of banking’s unique role in the economy. In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court recognized that bank competition is critically important for families who are trying to take out a mortgage or earn interest on their savings. Of course, bank competition also effects our commercial economy. As the Supreme Court wrote, if businesspeople are “denied credit because … banking alternatives have been eliminated by mergers, the whole edifice of an entrepreneurial system is threatened….”<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn11" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[11]</a> The Court underscored that excessive consolidation in the banking sector could imperil the free and fair functioning of the broader economy. In the Court’s words, “[C]oncentration in banking accelerates concentration generally.”<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn12" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[12]</a> It was true then and it remains true today: competition in banking and competition throughout our economy go hand in hand. </p>
<p>After Philadelphia National Bank, Congress codified the Department of Justice’s role in bank antitrust enforcement. Under the Bank Merger and Bank Holding Company Acts, the federal banking agencies are the primary authorities on bank merger review. The department has an important, but specific, role in the process.</p>
<p>As amended, the bank merger statutes prohibit the banking agencies from approving any merger that violates the antitrust laws unless the banking agency finds that the merger’s anticompetitive effects “are clearly outweighed in the public interest by the probable effect of the transaction in meeting the convenience and needs of the community to be served.”<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn13" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[13]</a> This assessment of “convenience and needs” is a distinctive feature of the bank merger statutes, which empower the bank regulators &#8211; and not the DOJ &#8211; to conduct this assessment. Indeed, the Supreme Court cautioned in Philadelphia National Bank that an otherwise illegal merger under the antitrust laws “is not saved because, on some ultimate reckoning of social or economic debits and credits, it may be deemed beneficial.”<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn14" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[14]</a></p>
<p>Congress directed the department to serve in an advisory capacity to the banking agencies by providing the agencies “a report on the competitive factors” involved in a bank merger.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn15" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[15]</a> At the same time, Congress authorized the DOJ to serve in its law enforcement capacity by challenging in court any anticompetitive bank merger that violates antitrust law.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn16" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[16]</a></p>
<p>On this milestone anniversary of Philadelphia National Bank, it is appropriate to take stock of how the department is fulfilling its statutory role in bank merger enforcement. As I have frequently said, we need to make sure our approach to investigating and analyzing mergers reflects current market realities and how competition presents itself today. The department’s review of bank mergers should follow this path.</p>
<p>The department and the federal banking agencies issued Bank Merger guidelines in 1995 to “identify proposed mergers that clearly do not have significant adverse effects on competition.”<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn17" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[17]</a> The 1995 Guidelines reflect that era’s approach to bank antitrust enforcement based on the industry realities of that time. These Guidelines attach great significance to market shares based on local branch deposits as a proxy for concentration and competition. For transactions that exceed a specific deposit concentration threshold, the 1995 Guidelines invite the merging banks to “resolve the problem by agreeing to make an appropriate divestiture.” It has since become standard practice for the DOJ to address such mergers by negotiating branch divestitures and entering into a Letter of Agreement &#8211; or settlement of sorts – with the parties.</p>
<p>Much has changed, however, since 1995. When the agencies issued the current guidelines, Congress had only months earlier removed legal barriers that prevented many banks from expanding beyond their home state.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn18" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[18]</a> Congress was still years away from authorizing banks to affiliate with investment banks and insurance companies.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn19" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[19]</a> At the time the agencies issued the 1995 Guidelines, the largest bank holding company had $250 billion in assets, less than one-seventh the size of the largest bank holding company today after adjusting for inflation.</p>
<p>Fast forward almost 30 years, and the number of “community banks” &#8211; or smaller banks that focus on lending in their local neighborhoods &#8211; has dropped by more than half, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). At the same time, the six largest bank holding companies have amassed as many assets as all other bank holding companies combined. To put it plainly: policymakers in 1995 confronted a much different banking system than the one we have today.</p>
<p>Against this backdrop, there are good reasons aside from the passage of time to question whether the 1995 Guidelines sufficiently reflect current market realities. A few examples. First, financial conglomerates today may compete in many more geographic areas, across many more business lines, and on many different dimensions than they did three decades ago. The 1995 Guidelines’ narrow focus on local market deposit concentration may therefore be inadequate to assess the likely competitive effects of a modern bank merger. It may also disproportionally focus enforcement on transactions involving small local banks and understate network concerns relating to large national and multi-national banks. Second, as the global economy has evolved and become more diverse, so too have customers’ financial services needs. A multinational corporation demands a much different cluster of financial services than a local business owner. Likewise, the needs of high net worth C-suite executive differ from those of a local school teacher. Finally, the emergence of fintech and other nonbank financial companies has been notable. How these companies should be factored into the competition analysis is appropriately fact-specific.</p>
<p>In his executive order on promoting competition, President Biden recognized the need for bank antitrust policy to better reflect today’s market realities and support a more resilient banking system that serves all types of customers and communities.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn20" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[20]</a></p>
<p>Consistent with the president’s executive order, the Antitrust Division invited public comment in late 2021 on whether and how to revise the 1995 Guidelines.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn21" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[21]</a> We received numerous thoughtful responses from public interest groups, banks, think tanks, and trade associations, among other stakeholders.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn22" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[22]</a> This public consultation followed an earlier comment period in 2020, which also elicited helpful feedback from a wide range of interested parties.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn23" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[23]</a> We are carefully considering the comments that we received during these two comprehensive rounds of public input.</p>
<p>Let me now describe what the Antitrust Division is doing to ensure that we fulfill our statutory obligation to protect the competitive process in the banking sector.</p>
<p>The Antitrust Division takes seriously its statutory responsibility to advise the relevant federal banking agencies about the competitive effects of a proposed merger, including our responsibility to analyze relevant competitive factors through the lens of current market realities.</p>
<p>To that end, the division is modernizing its approach to investigating and reporting on the full range of competitive factors involved in a bank merger to ensure that we are taking into account today’s market realities and the many dimensions of competition in the modern banking sector.</p>
<p>In preparing the competitive factors reports that we are required by law to submit to the banking agencies, the DOJ will assess the relevant competition in retail banking, small business banking, and large- and mid-size business banking in any given transaction. These analyses will include consideration of concentration levels across a wide range of appropriate metrics and not just local deposits and branch overlaps. Indeed, the division and the federal banking agencies are working together to augment the data sources we use when calculating market concentration to ensure we are relying on the best data possible and using state-of-the art tools to assess all relevant dimension of competition.</p>
<p>However, our competitive factors reports will not be limited to measuring concentration of bank deposits and branch overlaps. Rather, a competitive factors report should evaluate the many ways in which competition manifests itself in a particular banking market—including through fees, interest rates, branch locations, product variety, network effects, interoperability, and customer service.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn24" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[24]</a> Our competitive factors reports will increasingly address these dimensions of competition that may not be observable simply by measuring market concentration based on deposits alone.</p>
<p>Let me highlight two areas that will be of particular interest to the division as it prepares competitive factors reports.</p>
<p>First, the division will closely scrutinize mergers that increase risks associated with coordinated effects and multi-market contacts. The division will also examine the extent to which a transaction threatens to entrench power of the most dominant banks by excluding existing or potential disruptive threats or rivals. Our competitive factors reports must take into account these potential threats to competition just as we do in mergers throughout other areas of the economy. While we will scrutinize any transaction that presents substantive legal concerns, we will not limit our analysis to small and local bank acquisitions—where appropriate, we will also scrutinize the largest and most powerful actors.</p>
<p>Second, the division will carefully consider how a proposed merger may affect competition for different customer segments. Though far from perfect, the modern banking system features a wide variety of different types of banks that serve different customer needs. For example, some banks specialize in relationship lending and personalized service, leveraging their unique knowledge of their local communities. Other banks operate extensive regional or nationwide branch networks and offer sophisticated mobile banking capabilities. This diversity creates choices for customers who may comparison shop and choose the type of bank that best meets their needs. To protect competition, antitrust enforcers must ensure that customers retain a meaningful choice as to the type of bank with which they do business by recognizing that different segments of customers have different needs and that substitution across different types of banks may be limited.<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftn25" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[25]</a></p>
<p>A few words on remedies. Our job at the Antitrust Division is enforcing the law, not micromanaging or regulating the private sector. We owe it to the public to maintain a high bar for the divestitures we will accept as remedies and to evaluate fully the risks associated with carve-out divestitures, in particular. Branch divestitures are not always adequate to address the broader range of competitive concerns, including interoperability and network effects, among many other potential areas that may be relevant to a particular review. Nor are we able to consider how, if at all, an otherwise anticompetitive merger might impact the convenience and needs of a community, a role the bank merger statutes specifically reserve for the bank regulators.</p>
<p>These judgments, in our view, are best made by banking regulators, informed by their unique supervisory experience and powers. We are in the process of reorienting the Antitrust Division’s role to focus on providing our advisory opinion as required by the statute and not remedies agreements with parties (as has become custom over the last many years). The goal is for this revised procedure to faithfully effectuate the department’s limited &#8211; but essential &#8211; statutory role in bank antitrust enforcement and facilitate the banking agencies’ analysis of competition and other factors as part of their broader bank merger review framework and statutory approval authorities. This approach preserves our authority to challenge a bank merger under the antitrust laws, consistent with the statutory framework Congress established.</p>
<p>Of course, our work does not end there. Our Bank Merger Guidelines need updating. Guidelines are valuable tools that we use to identify harms to competition and the types of evidence we use to investigate a merger’s likelihood of resulting in those harms. Updated Bank Merger Guidelines will provide valuable guidance to the antitrust bar and the banking community more generally. However, guidelines are not law &#8211; the law and precedents like Philadelphia National Bank are our ultimate guides, and we plan to anchor any revisions to the guidelines in binding precedent and statutory text.</p>
<p>We look forward to continuing to collaborate with the talented leadership and staff of the Federal Reserve, FDIC and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency on new Bank Merger Guidelines. Our staffs have been engaged in productive discussions, and I am optimistic that we will develop new guidelines that reflect our responsibility to protect competition in the banking system, consistent with the Executive Order from our president. As we update the Bank Merger Guidelines, we must ensure that our enforcement decisions are attuned to current market realities and not based on an outdated conception of banking.</p>
<p>I have deep nostalgia for our banking system as it existed in 1995. Like many of you, I remember the excitement of being handed a free toaster when signing up for a new account. I recall the weekly ritual when members of the local community would wait in line on Friday to deposit a check and withdraw cash for the upcoming week. A lot has changed since then, but curiously our Bank Merger Guidelines have not. As we stare down the realities of our financial system in 2023, the time is ripe for us to revisit the Bank Merger Guidelines to make sure that we are applying the legal holdings and principles of Philadelphia National Bank and its progeny in a manner that is consistent with modern market realities.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref1" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[1]</a> 374 U.S. 321 (1963).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref2" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[2]</a> Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy, Exec. Order No. 14036, 86 Fed. Reg. 36,987 (July 9, 2021).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref3" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[3]</a> Department of Justice, Bank Merger Competitive Review – Introduction and Overview (Issued 1995).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref4" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[4]</a> 374 U.S. at 363 (“[A] merger which produces a firm controlling an undue percentage share of the relevant market, and results in a significant increase in the concentration of firms in that market is so inherently likely to lessen competition substantially that it must be enjoined in the absence of evidence clearly showing that the merger is not likely to have such anticompetitive effects.”).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref5" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[5]</a> Id. at 367.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref6" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[6]</a> Id. at 362-63.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref7" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[7]</a> See, e.g., F.T.C. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 246 F.3d 708, 715 (D.C. Cir. 2001); United States v. Anthem, Inc., 236 F. Supp. 3d 171, 191-92 (D.D.C. 2017).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref8" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[8]</a> While General Dynamics acknowledged they are subject to a rebuttal step, in so doing it reaffirmed Philadelphia National Bank’s foundational principles. See United States v. General Dynamics, 415 U.S. 486, 497-499 (1974) (explaining that share statistics and trend toward concentration “would…have sufficed to support a finding of undue concentration in the absence of other considerations,” and that the question then becomes whether those other factors “mandate a conclusion that no substantial lessening of competition is threatened by the merger”). </p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref9" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[9]</a> See United States v. Aetna Inc., 240 F. Supp. 3d 1, 42-43 (D.D.C. 2017) (holding that the government established its prima facie case based on “compelling concentration figures” showing that “the post-merger HHI would reflect a merger to monopoly”); FTC v. H.J. Heinz Co., 246 F.3d 708, 715 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (holding that the government makes it prima facie case by showing “that the merger would produce a firm controlling an undue percentage share of the relevant market, and [would] result[] in a significant increase in the concentration of firms in that market’”) (quoting Philadelphia Nat’l Bank, 374 U.S. at 363); see also Herbert Hovenkamp &; Carl Shapiro, Horizontal Mergers, Market Structure, and Burdens of Proof, 127 Yale L.J. 1996, 2008 (2018) (“Not only is the structural presumption theoretically and empirically justified but it is also very well-established in the case law.”).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref10" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[10]</a> Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963); Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref11" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[11]</a> 374 U.S. at 372.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref12" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[12]</a> Id. at 370.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref13" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[13]</a> 12 U.S.C. §§ 1828(c)(5), 1842(c)(1).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref14" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[14]</a> 374 U.S. at 371.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref15" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[15]</a> 12 U.S.C. § 1828(c)(4)(A)(i).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref16" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[16]</a> 12 U.S.C. §§ 1828(c)(7), 1849(b)(1).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref17" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[17]</a> Department of Justice, supra note 3.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref18" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[18]</a> Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-328, 108 Stat. 2338.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref19" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[19]</a> Gramm-Leach Bliley Act, Pub. L. No. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref20" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[20]</a> Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy, Exec. Order No. 14036, 86 Fed. Reg. 36,987 (July 9, 2021).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref21" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[21]</a> Press Release, Dep’t of Justice, Antitrust Division Seeks Additional Public Comments on Bank Merger Competitive Analysis (Dec. 7, 2021), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/antitrust-division-seeks-additional-public-comments-bank-merger-competitive-analysis.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref22" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[22]</a> 2022 Antitrust Div. Banking Guidelines Rev.: Public Comments (Dep’t. of Justice through Antitrust Division), https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-division-banking-guidelines-review-public-comments-topics-issues-guide/2022-Bank-Guideline-Review.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref23" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[23]</a> Press Release, Dep’t Of Justice, Antitrust Division Seeks Public Comments on Updating Bank Merger Review Analysis (Sep. 1, 2020), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/antitrust-division-seeks-public-comments-updating-bank-merger-review-analysis. In addition, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has requested public comment on its bank merger framework. See Request for Information and Comment on Rules, Regulations, Guidance, and Statements of Policy Regarding Bank Merger Transactions, 87 Fed. Reg. 18,740 (Mar. 31, 2022).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref24" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[24]</a> Philadelphia National Bank, 374 U.S. 321, 368 (1963) (“Competition among banks exists at every level— price, variety of credit arrangements, convenience of location, attractiveness of physical surroundings, credit information, investment advice, service charges, personal accommodations, advertising, [and] miscellaneous special and extra services….”</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/#_ftnref25" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">[25]</a> See, e.g., Robert M. Adams, Kenneth P. Brevoort &; Elizabeth K. Kiser, Who Competes With Whom? The Case of Depository Institutions, 55 J. Indus. Econ. 141 (2007) (finding limited customer substitution between multi-market and single-market banks).</p>
<p> Speaker: <a href="https://www.justice.gov/atr/staff-profile/meet-assistant-attorney-general" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Assistant Attorney General, Jonathan Kanter</a>Topic(s): AntitrustComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/atr/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Antitrust Division</a> </p>
<p> Updated June 20, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-jonathan-kanter-delivers-keynote-address-brookings-institution> Original Article </a></p>

Justice Department Announces New National Security Cyber Section Within the National Security Division
<h2>Related Content</h2>
<p>Press Release <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-jury-convicts-three-defendants-interstate-stalking-chinese-nationals-united-states" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Federal Jury Convicts Three Defendants of Interstate Stalking of Chinese Nationals in the United States and Two Defendants of Acting or Conspiring to Act on Behalf of the People’s Republic of China</a></p>
<p>Earlier today, a federal jury in Brooklyn, New York, convicted three defendants on multiple counts of a superseding indictment charging them with acting and conspiring to act in the United&#8230;</p>
<p><time datetime="2023-06-20T12:00:00Z">June 20, 2023</time></p>
<p>Speech <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-matthew-g-olsen-delivers-remarks-hoover-institution-announcing" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen Delivers Remarks at Hoover Institution Announcing National Security Cyber Section </a>Washington</p>
<p>I’ve been in this job a little over a year and a half. Every day I sit with the Attorney General and FBI Director for the morning threat briefing and&#8230;</p>
<p><time datetime="2023-06-20T12:00:00Z">June 20, 2023</time></p>
<p>Press Release <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/air-national-guardsman-indicted-unlawful-disclosure-classified-national-defense-information" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Air National Guardsman Indicted for Unlawful Disclosure of Classified National Defense Information</a></p>
<p>A member of the U.S. Air National Guard (USANG) stationed in Massachusetts was indicted today by a federal grand jury in Boston for allegedly retaining and transmitting classified national defense&#8230;</p>
<p><time datetime="2023-06-15T12:00:00Z">June 15, 2023</time><a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-new-national-security-cyber-section-within-national-security"> Original Article </a></p>

Readout of Justice Department Convening with National Public Defense Organizations Hosted by the Office for Access to Justice
<h2>Related Content </h2>
<p> Speech<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/director-rachel-rossi-office-access-justice-delivers-remarks-black-public-defender" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Director Rachel Rossi of the Office for Access to Justice Delivers Remarks at the Black Public Defender Association Conference</a>Baltimore</p>
<p>Thank you, Heather. I want to extend my appreciation to you, the National Legal Aid and Defender Association, the Black Public Defender Association and Alaina Bloodworth and April Frazier Camara&#8230;</p>
<p><time datetime="2023-06-14T12:00:00Z">June 14, 2023</time></p>
<p> Press Release<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-director-rachel-rossi-office-access-justice-adoption-equal-access-justice" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Statement from Director Rachel Rossi of the Office for Access to Justice on the Adoption of the Equal Access to Justice Resolution at the United Nations Crime Commission</a></p>
<p>The Office for Access to Justice today issued the following statement from Director Rachel Rossi following the adoption of the “Equal Access to Justice for All” resolution at the 32nd&#8230;</p>
<p><time datetime="2023-06-07T12:00:00Z">June 7, 2023</time></p>
<p> Speech<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/director-rachel-rossi-office-access-justice-delivers-remarks-american-bar-association-s" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Director Rachel Rossi of the Office for Access to Justice Delivers Remarks at the American Bar Association’s Rule of Law Initiative Event</a>Washington</p>
<p>Thank you, Scott, for that kind introduction, and deep gratitude to ABA’s Rule of Law Initiative for their ongoing partnership, and for hosting this impactful event. A huge thank you&#8230;</p>
<p><time datetime="2023-05-16T12:00:00Z">May 16, 2023</time><a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/readout-justice-department-convening-national-public-defense-organizations-hosted-office> Original Article </a></p>

Owner of Car Parts Remanufacturing Company Pleads Guilty to Employment Tax Crime
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Tuesday, June 20, 2023<br />
 Owner of Car Parts Remanufacturing Company Pleads Guilty to Employment Tax Crime</p>
<h2>Did not pay more than $1.2M in payroll taxes</h2>
<p>A Minnesota man who owned an automobile transmission business pleaded guilty today to willfully failing to account for and pay over employment taxes.</p>
<p>According to court documents and statements made in court, Timothy J. Lundquist owned and operated Dynotec Industries, Inc., an automobile transmission remanufacturing company based in Jordan, Minnesota. Lundquist was responsible for filing quarterly employment tax returns and collecting and paying over to the IRS payroll taxes withheld from employees’ wages. For at least the last quarter of 2013 through 2018, Lundquist did not, however, or pay withholdings to the IRS or file required employment tax returns. In total, he caused a tax loss to the IRS of over $1.2 million.</p>
<p>Lundquist faces a statutory maximum of five years in prison. He also faces a period of supervised release, restitution, and monetary penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.</p>
<p>Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Stuart M. Goldberg of the Justice Department’s Tax Division made the announcement.</p>
<p>IRS-Criminal Investigation is investigating the case.</p>
<p>Trial Attorney Ahmed Almudallal of the Justice Department’s Tax Division is prosecuting the case.</p>
<p> Topic(s): TaxComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/tax/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Tax Division</a>Press Release Number: 23-682 </p>
<p> Updated June 20, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/owner-car-parts-remanufacturing-company-pleads-guilty-employment-tax-crime> Original Article </a></p>

Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen Delivers Remarks at Hoover Institution Announcing National Security Cyber Section
<p>I’ve been in this job a little over a year and a half. Every day I sit with the Attorney General and FBI Director for the morning threat briefing and each day I read the Presidential Daily Brief. Day-after-day, week-after-week, the intelligence reporting details the astonishing pace, scale and sophistication of cyber threats to the United States.</p>
<p>Hostile nations are accelerating their use of cyber-enabled means to carry out a range of threatening activity. These countries are stealing sensitive technologies, trade secrets, intellectual property and personally identifying information; exerting malign influence and exporting repression; and holding our critical infrastructure at risk to destructive or disruptive attacks.</p>
<p>You don’t need access to classified intelligence to understand what we are up against from countries like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.</p>
<p>Take just a few snippets from the Intelligence Community (IC)’s public Annual Threat Assessment for this year.</p>
<p>China has compromised telecommunications firms. It conducts cyber intrusions targeting journalists and dissidents in order to suppress the free flow of information. And the PRC is capable of launching cyberattacks that could disrupt U.S. critical infrastructure.</p>
<p>Russia is bolstering its ability to compromise critical infrastructure, such as industrial control systems, in part to demonstrate it has the ability to inflict damage during a crisis. Iran, too, continues to be an aggressive cyber actor, taking advantage of the asymmetric nature of cyberattacks.</p>
<p>And North Korea is turning to illicit cyber activities to steal the funds and technical knowledge it needs to further its <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/category/military-scammer/" title="military" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="415">military</a> aspirations and Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programs.</p>
<p>Our adversaries also imperil the United States by acting as safe havens for cyber criminals who carry out ransomware attacks and digital extortion for personal profit.</p>
<p>That’s what the intelligence community is willing to say in public about what we are up against – and it’s not a pretty picture.</p>
<p>The good news is that our response to national security cyber threats has gotten more effective in recent years. We are putting hard-earned lessons into practice.</p>
<p>One lesson we’ve learned from our counterterrorism efforts after 9/11 is the importance of ensuring agencies like FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the IC and Department of Defense (DoD), are working as one team, sharing information and deploying authorities in a coordinated manner.</p>
<p>We are also coordinating government actions with foreign partners and the private sector to empower technical operations, leverage sanctions and trade remedies, and join in diplomatic efforts with like-minded countries. And we are applying the key lesson that effectively combating nation-state cyber threats requires shoring up private sector cybersecurity to make us collectively less vulnerable.</p>
<p>In March, the White House released the National Cybersecurity Strategy in order to drive a “more intentional, more coordinated, and more well-resourced approach to cyber defense.” At the Department of Justice, we are putting that vision into practice. Federal law enforcement wields some of the most powerful tools in our arsenal. In recent years, we have achieved successes in deploying those tools – and we can build on this success.</p>
<p>The Justice Department has never been more effective in identifying, addressing and eliminating cyber threats affecting our nation’s security.</p>
<p>Here is the playbook that’s working. First, as you’d expect of prosecutors, we enforce U.S. criminal law – investigating and prosecuting individuals for illegal cyber activity, imposing costs on them and deterring others. Just a few examples from last year:</p>
<p>We charged three Iranians with conducting a ransomware campaign that targeted hospitals, local governments and organizations all over the world.</p>
<p>We secured a 20-year prison sentence for an individual who leveraged teams of hackers and insiders in a multi-faceted espionage campaign targeting American and European aviation companies on behalf of PRC intelligence.</p>
<p>Shortly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we unsealed indictments that publicly demonstrated how two different sets of Russian state-sponsored actors compromised devices at hundreds of critical infrastructure providers around the world, deploying malware designed to enable future physical damage.</p>
<p>We are holding individuals accountable, imposing consequences, and using our indictments to inform the public about the nature of the threats we face, and our adversaries that their actions are not as deniable as they’d like to think.</p>
<p>Second, we are proactive – using the full range of our authorities to disrupt national security cyber threats before a significant attack or intrusion can occur. This includes the innovative use of our legal tools beyond traditional criminal charges.</p>
<p>Just last month, the Justice Department and FBI conducted “Operation Medusa.” This was a technical operation to dismantle and effectively neutralize the “Snake” malware, one of the Russian government’s most sophisticated computer intrusion tools. The FSB had used versions of the Snake malware for nearly 20 years to steal sensitive information from hundreds of computer systems in at least 50 countries, including NATO governments. Through innovative use of our Rule 41 search warrant authority, as well as collaboration with private sector partners and numerous foreign governments, the Justice Department disabled one of the FSB’s most sensitive, complex espionage tools.</p>
<p>Last year, we conducted a court-approved operation to dismantle a GRU botnet that relied on compromised firewall security appliances. Working with the company that manufactured those devices, the FBI developed a court-authorized technical solution to delete the GRU’s malware and close the vulnerabilities in compromised devices.</p>
<p>We have also used our cryptocurrency tracing abilities and our seizure authorities to prevent over $100 million in ill-gotten crypto from being used by North Korea to support its missile programs. These efforts have focused both on hackers, who have stolen hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of cryptocurrency, and on IT workers who use online platforms to earn illegal revenue. By coordinating asset freezes and sanctions, the U.S. government has stopped the DPRK from accessing a huge portion of their illicit gains, much of which remains stranded on the blockchain.</p>
<p>Finally, we coordinate our efforts with interagency partners, foreign governments and the private sector to use the full force of tools – technical operations, sanctions, trade remedies and diplomatic efforts. For example, in the Iran indictments I mentioned a minute ago, we enhanced the impact of the public indictment by working with Treasury to impose sanctions connecting those defendants to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.</p>
<p>Intelligence also plays a key role. We share targeted threat intelligence gathered as a result of our investigations to empower private sector companies to defend themselves. For example, following the Colonial Pipeline attack, we were able to acquire information – using Section 702 of FISA – that verified the hacker’s identity and enabled the government to recover the majority of the ransom.</p>
<p>Our commitment to combating these threats using every tool we’ve got is making an impact. We are making it harder for hostile nations to maneuver and recruit by imposing accountability. We are denying our adversaries access to technical infrastructure and cutting off their funding. We’re disrupting the criminal ecosystem by making cybercrime and ransomware less lucrative and higher risk. We are helping the private sector defend itself more effectively with key intelligence and threat information. We’re marshaling the efforts of like-minded nations around the world on both diplomatic and law enforcement fronts.</p>
<p>As determined as our adversaries might be in escalating their brazen activities, they are learning that we are even more determined to protect the United States and our allies.</p>
<p>Since we first charged five members of the PLA in 2014, NSD has been leading the charge with just a handful of dedicated cyber prosecutors, operating on grit, coffee and a shoestring budget. And none of these cases would be possible without the close partnership of enterprising U.S. Attorneys’ Offices. So, I am proud of the work being done in the National Security Division, in U.S. Attorneys’ Offices around the country, at the FBI, and across the Department of Justice.</p>
<p>The cases and disruptions I discussed earlier did not come easy. They’re often fast-paced and span international boundaries; they involve highly technical data and often classified data and demand innovative legal approaches. These are actions that require dedicated time, attention, and expertise. Now, we are aggressively growing our national security cyber program.</p>
<p>Today, I am announcing that we are establishing a new National Security Cyber Section – NatSec Cyber, for short – within the National Security Division. This new, full litigating section – which now has the approval of Congress – will place our work on cyber threats on equal footing with NSD’s Counterterrorism Section and the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.</p>
<p>This new section will allow NSD to increase the scale and speed of disruption campaigns and prosecutions of nation-state threat actors, state-sponsored cybercriminals, associated money launderers, and other cyber-enabled threats to national security.</p>
<p>The creation of a new section responds to the core findings in Deputy Attorney General Monaco’s <a href="https://www.justice.gov/media/1232936/dl?inline" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Comprehensive Cyber Review</a>, released in July 2022, that charted the evolving nature of the cyber threat. It will help fulfill a core pillar of the Biden Administration’s National Cybersecurity Strategy: to disrupt and dismantle threat actors by working across federal agencies.</p>
<p>NatSec Cyber will give us the horsepower and organizational structure we need to carry out key roles of the Department in this arena. NatSec Cyber prosecutors will be positioned to act quickly, as soon as the FBI or an IC partner identifies a cyber-enabled threat, and to support investigations and disruptions from the earliest stages.</p>
<p>Having prosecutors that are fully dedicated to national security cyber cases will deepen our expertise. It will enable us to better collaborate with our key partners, especially our colleagues in the Criminal Division’s Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section, which plays a particularly crucial role in ransomware and other criminal cases. And, in order to more closely integrate with the FBI’s Cyber Division, the NatSec Cyber Section will mirror that structure, organizing leadership by geographical threat actor.</p>
<p>The new section will also serve as a resource for prosecutors in U.S. Attorneys’ Offices around the country. U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, along with FBI field offices, represent the tip of the spear in confronting many of the threats in their districts. Responding to highly technical cyber threats often requires significant time and resources, which aren’t always possible with the demands on individual offices. NatSec Cyber will serve as an incubator, able to invest in the time-intensive and complex investigative work for early-stage cases.</p>
<p>The section will also allow prosecutors to work seamlessly with colleagues focused on the interagency policy process in the National Security Council. That process has become increasingly central to the effective deployment of the government’s cyber capabilities under the leadership of Deputy National Security Advisor for Cyber and Emerging Technologies Anne Neuberger.</p>
<p>Here’s the bottom line: Cybersecurity is a matter of national security. Our cyber adversaries are innovative and constantly adjusting their tactics to hide from our investigators and to overcome our network defenders.</p>
<p>NSD is committed to matching our adversaries by adjusting our tactics and organization to bring all of our tools, authorities and expertise to this fight.</p>
<p> Speaker: <a href="https://www.justice.gov/nsd/staff-profile/assistant-attorney-general-matthew-g-olsen" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Matthew G. Olsen, Assistant Attorney General</a>Topic(s): Countering Nation-State ThreatsNational SecurityCybercrimeComponent(s): <a href="https://www.justice.gov/nsd" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">National Security Division (NSD)</a> </p>
<p> Updated June 20, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-matthew-g-olsen-delivers-remarks-hoover-institution-announcing> Original Article </a></p>

Man Convicted of $54M Bribery and Kickback Scheme Involving Fraudulent Prescriptions
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Friday, June 16, 2023<br />
 Man Convicted of $54M Bribery and Kickback Scheme Involving Fraudulent Prescriptions</p>
<p>A federal jury convicted a Florida man for his role in a $54 million bribery and kickback scheme involving TRICARE, a federal program that provides health insurance benefits to active duty and retired service members and their families. </p>
<p>According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, David Byron Copeland, 55, of Tallahassee, was a part-owner and senior sales manager at Florida Pharmacy Solutions (FPS), a Florida-based pharmacy that specialized in compounded prescription drugs. Copeland, along with his accomplices, engaged in a practice known as “test billing” to develop the most expensive combination of compounded drugs to maximize reimbursement from TRICARE. Copeland and his accomplices targeted physicians who treated TRICARE beneficiaries and paid bribes and kickbacks to physicians and salespeople to encourage the referral of prescriptions to FPS. The bribes included lavish hunting trips and expensive dinners. In addition, Copeland and his accomplices used “blanket letters of authorization” that allowed FPS to modify the prescription components to make them more profitable. </p>
<p>Copeland and his sales representatives were paid millions of dollars in kickbacks based on a percentage of the amount that TRICARE reimbursed for their prescriptions, which provided an incentive to seek prescriptions for the most expensive compounded drugs possible, including pain and scar creams. Copeland facilitated the kickbacks through companies he set up to receive and funnel the payments. From late 2012 through mid-2015, FPS billed TRICARE over $54 million for its compounded pharmaceuticals. </p>
<p>The jury convicted Copeland of two counts of soliciting and receiving illegal health care kickbacks and three counts of offering and paying illegal health care kickbacks. The jury acquitted Copeland of conspiracy to defraud the United States and to pay and receive illegal health care kickbacks. His sentencing is scheduled for Sept. 14. He faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison for each kickback count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.</p>
<p>Two other men, James Wesley Moss, the former chief executive officer of FPS, and Michael Gordon, a former FPS sales representative, previously pleaded guilty for their roles in the scheme and are awaiting sentencing.</p>
<p>Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney Roger Handberg for the Middle District of Florida; Special Agent in Charge Darrin K. Jones of the U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (DOD-OIG), Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Southeast Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Omar Perez of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (HHS-OIG), Miami Regional Office; Special Agent in Charge David Spilker of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General (VA-OIG), Southeast Field Office; and Special Agent in Charge David Walker of the FBI Tampa Field Office made the announcement.</p>
<p>The DOD-OIG, HHS-OIG, VA-OIG, and FBI investigated the case.</p>
<p>Trial Attorneys Devon Helfmeyer, Katie Rookard, and Clayton Solomon of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.</p>
<p>The Fraud Section leads the Criminal Division’s efforts to combat health care fraud through the Health Care Fraud Strike Force Program. Since March 2007, this program, comprised of 15 strike forces operating in 25 federal districts, has charged more than 5,000 defendants who collectively have billed the Medicare program for more than $24 billion. In addition, the Centers for Medicare &; Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services, are taking steps to hold providers accountable for their involvement in health care fraud schemes. More information can be found at <a href="https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/health-care-fraud-unit" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/health-care-fraud-unit</a>.</p>
<p> Topic(s): Health Care FraudComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/criminal/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Criminal Division</a><a href="https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Criminal &#8211; Criminal Fraud Section</a><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-mdfl" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; Florida, Middle</a>Press Release Number: 23-678 </p>
<p> Updated June 16, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/man-convicted-54m-bribery-and-kickback-scheme-involving-fraudulent-prescriptions> Original Article </a></p>

Canadian Man Convicted in Multimillion-Dollar Psychic Mass-Mailing Fraud Scheme
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Friday, June 16, 2023<br />
 Canadian Man Convicted in Multimillion-Dollar Psychic Mass-Mailing Fraud Scheme</p>
<p>A federal jury in the Eastern District of New York convicted a Canadian man today for perpetrating a decades-long mass-mailing fraud scheme that stole more than $175 million from victims in the United States.</p>
<p>According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Patrice Runner, 57, a Canadian and French citizen, operated a mass-mailing fraud scheme from 1994 through November 2014. As part of the scheme, Runner sent letters to millions of U.S. consumers, many of whom were elderly and vulnerable. The letters falsely purported to be individualized, personal communications from so-called “psychics,” including Maria Duval (leading this type of fraud scheme to be referred to as a “Maria Duval Scam”), and promised that the recipient had the opportunity to achieve great wealth and happiness with the psychic’s assistance, in exchange for payment of a fee. Once a victim made a single payment in response to one of the letters, the victim was bombarded with dozens of additional letters, all purporting to be personalized communications from the psychics and offering additional services and items for a fee. </p>
<p>Although the scheme’s letters frequently stated that a psychic had seen a personalized vision regarding the recipient of the letter, in fact, the scheme sent nearly identical form letters to tens of thousands of victims each week. Runner and his co-conspirators obtained the names of elderly and vulnerable victims by renting and trading mailing lists with other mail fraud schemes. In reality, the so-called “psychics” identified in the letters sent by the scheme had no role in sending the letters, did not receive responses from the victims, and did not send the additional letters after victims paid money. Some victims made dozens of payments in response to the fraudulent letters, losing thousands of dollars.</p>
<p>Runner directed the scheme for the entirety of its 20-year operation, providing instructions to co-conspirators who ran the day-to-day operations through a Canadian company. Runner used a series of shell companies registered in Canada and Hong Kong to hide his involvement in the scheme while living in multiple foreign countries, including Switzerland, France, the Netherlands, Costa Rica, and Spain.</p>
<p>Runner was extradited from Spain to the United States in December 2020.</p>
<p>“This case exemplifies the commitment of the Department of Justice’s Consumer Protection Branch and its partners in the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to investigating and prosecuting fraud schemes targeting Americans, no matter where in the world those schemes originate,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We will work with our law enforcement partners in the United States and around the world to bring to justice criminals who target Americans.” </p>
<p>“For over 20 years, Patrice Runner managed a predatory scheme that targeted older American by mailing personalized letters to millions of victims purporting to be from a world renown psychic. Yesterday’s verdict should have come as no surprise to Mr. Runner,” said Inspector in Charge Chris Nielsen of the Postal Inspection Service’s Philadelphia Division. “Postal Inspectors are committed to protecting American consumers by eliminating these fraudulent mailings from the mailstream.”</p>
<p>Runner was convicted of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, eight counts of mail fraud, four counts of wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. He was found not guilty on four counts of mail fraud.</p>
<p>Runner will be sentenced at a later date and faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison on each count. He remains in prison pending sentencing. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.</p>
<p>Four other people previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud in connection with this mass-mailing fraud scheme: Maria Thanos, 59, of Montreal, Canada; Philip Lett, 52, of Montreal, Canada; Sherry Gore, 72, of Indiana; and Daniel Arnold, 61, of Connecticut.</p>
<p>The U.S. Postal Inspection Service investigated the case. Assistant Director John W. Burke and Trial Attorneys Charles B. Dunn, Rachel Baron, and Ann Entwistle of the Justice Department’s Consumer Protection Branch are prosecuting the case. The Justice Department&#039;s Office of International Affairs worked with law enforcement partners in Spain to secure the arrest and extradition of Runner. </p>
<p>The department urges individuals to be on the lookout for lottery, prize notification, and sweepstakes scams. If you receive a phone call, letter, or email promising a large prize in exchange for a fee, do not respond. Fraudsters often will use official-sounding names or the names of real lotteries or sweepstakes, or pretend to be a government agent purportedly helping to secure a prize.</p>
<p>If you or someone you know is age 60 or older and has experienced <a class="wpil_keyword_link" href="https://www.fraudswatch.com/tag/financial-fraud/" title="financial" data-wpil-keyword-link="linked" data-wpil-monitor-id="1014">financial</a> fraud, experienced professionals are standing by at the National Elder Fraud Hotline: 1-833-FRAUD-11 (1-833-372-8311). This U.S. Department of Justice hotline, managed by the Office for Victims of Crime, can provide personalized support to callers by assessing the needs of the victim and identifying relevant next steps. Case managers will identify appropriate reporting agencies, provide information to callers to assist them in reporting, connect callers directly with appropriate agencies, and provide resources and referrals, on a case-by-case basis. Reporting is the first step. Reporting can help authorities identify those who commit fraud and reporting certain financial losses due to fraud as soon as possible can increase the likelihood of recovering losses. The hotline is open Monday through Friday from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. ET. English, Spanish and other languages are available. The Federal Trade Commission also provides a hotline at 877-FTC-HELP and a website at <a href="http://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov</a> to receive consumer complaints.</p>
<p>More information about the department’s efforts to help American seniors is available at its Elder Justice Initiative webpage. For more information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts, visit its website at <a href="https://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch</a>. The Department of Justice provides information about a variety of resources relating to elder fraud victimization through its Office for Victims of Crime, which are available at <a href="http://www.ovc.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">www.ovc.gov.</a></p>
<p> Component(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/civil/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Civil Division</a>Press Release Number: 23-677 </p>
<p> Updated June 16, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/canadian-man-convicted-multimillion-dollar-psychic-mass-mailing-fraud-scheme> Original Article </a></p>

Woman Pleads Guilty to Murder Conspiracy
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Friday, June 16, 2023<br />
 Woman Pleads Guilty to Murder Conspiracy</p>
<p>An Illinois woman pleaded guilty today for her role in a conspiracy to murder her mother while they vacationed in Bali, Indonesia, in August 2014. </p>
<p>According to court documents, Heather Mack, 27, originally from Chicago, and her boyfriend, Tommy Schaefer, conspired to kill Mack’s mother while Mack and her mother vacationed in Bali. Mack arranged for Schaefer to travel to Bali using her mother’s credit card. After Schaefer arrived, Mack and Schaefer exchanged a series of text messages about how and when to kill Mack’s mother, which included a discussion about suffocating or beating the victim. Shortly after these text messages were exchanged, on Aug. 12, 2014, Schaefer entered her mother’s hotel room and, while Mack was present, brutally beat and killed Mack’s mother. Mack and Schaefer then placed the victim’s body into a suitcase and tried to leave the hotel in a taxi. When the driver of the taxi refused to accept their fare, Mack told hotel employees that she was going to go call her mother. Mack and Schaefer then fled the hotel and abandoned the suitcase containing the victim’s body in the taxicab. Mack and Schaefer were arrested by Indonesian police at another hotel in Bali the day after the murder.</p>
<p>In 2015, Mack and Schaefer were convicted in Indonesia of local criminal charges related to the murder. Mack was sentenced to 10 years in prison and released after serving seven years. Schaefer was sentenced to 18 years in prison and currently remains imprisoned in Indonesia. In November 2021, upon arrival in the United States, Mack was arrested on U.S. federal charges relating to the murder. Schaefer was also charged in the U.S. indictment, and those charges remain pending against him.</p>
<p>Mack pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to kill a U.S. national. She is scheduled to be sentenced on Dec. 18 and faces a maximum penalty of 28 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.</p>
<p>Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Morris Pasqual for the Northern District of Illinois, and Special Agent in Charge Robert W. “Wes” Wheeler Jr. of the FBI Chicago Field Office made the announcement.</p>
<p>Senior Trial Attorney Frank Rangoussis of the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Ann Marie Ursini for the Northern District of Illinois are prosecuting the case. </p>
<p>Valuable assistance was provided by the Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs, as well as the FBI Legal Attaché Office in Jakarta, Indonesia. </p>
<p><em>An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.</em></p>
<p> Component(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/criminal/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Criminal Division</a><a href="https://www.justice.gov/criminal-hrsp" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Criminal &#8211; Human Rights and Special Prosecution Section</a><a href="https://www.justice.gov/criminal-oia" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Criminal &#8211; Office of International Affairs</a><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; Illinois, Northern</a>Press Release Number: 23-676 </p>
<p> Updated June 16, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/woman-pleads-guilty-murder-conspiracy> Original Article </a></p>

Lab Billing Company Settles False Claims Act Allegations Relating to Unnecessary Respiratory Panels Run on Seniors Receiving COVID-19 Tests
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />
 Friday, June 16, 2023<br />
 Lab Billing Company Settles False Claims Act Allegations Relating to Unnecessary Respiratory Panels Run on Seniors Receiving COVID-19 Tests</p>
<p>VitalAxis Inc., a Maryland-based billing company for diagnostic laboratories, has agreed to pay $300,479.58 to resolve False Claims Act allegations that it caused the submission of false claims to Medicare for medically unnecessary respiratory pathogen panels run on seniors who received COVID-19 tests.</p>
<p>Throughout 2020, VitalAxis performed billing services for a diagnostic laboratory in Atlanta, Georgia that provided COVID-19 testing to residents of senior living communities. For one chain of communities, the laboratory directed VitalAxis to bill Medicare for respiratory pathogen panels purportedly ordered by a physician who had not actually ordered the tests and who was ineligible to treat Medicare beneficiaries. VitalAxis found the credentials of a different physician and, without authorization, billed Medicare using that physician’s name. Medicare subsequently paid the laboratory for these medically unnecessary tests.</p>
<p>“Federal health care programs only pay for items or services that are reasonable and medically necessary,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Today’s settlement demonstrates our commitment to pursue those who exploited the COVID-19 pandemic by billing the government for wasteful tests that nobody wanted or needed.”</p>
<p>“Unscrupulous companies that exploit the Medicare billing system divert important resources away from the program and abuse patient trust,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Buchanan for the Northern District of Georgia. “This civil resolution confirms that our district is committed to protecting our federal programs from fraud and holding those accountable who knowingly waste taxpayer dollars.”</p>
<p>“When companies bill for medically unnecessary services, they waste valuable taxpayer dollars and undermine the integrity of federal health care programs,” said Special Agent in Charge Tamala Miles with the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG). “As this settlement illustrates, HHS-OIG is committed to protecting the interests of the American taxpayer and holding health care providers accountable should they attempt to exploit the Medicare program.”</p>
<p>VitalAxis received a credit in connection with the settlement announced today in recognition of their cooperation, including by performing and disclosing the results of an internal investigation, disclosing relevant facts and material not known to the government but relevant to its investigation, providing information relevant to potential misconduct by other individuals and entities, and admitting liability.</p>
<p>The resolution obtained in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia, with assistance from the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General.</p>
<p>This matter was handled by Deputy Director Paul R. Perkins of the Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Mellori Lumpkin-Dawson and Civil Investigator Alena Evans of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia.</p>
<p>The investigation and resolution of this matter illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud. One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act. Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, can be reported to the Department of Health and Human Services at 800-HHS-TIPS (800-447-8477).</p>
<p>On May 17, 2021, the Attorney General established the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to marshal the resources of the Justice Department in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud. The task force bolsters efforts to investigate and prosecute the most culpable domestic and international actors committing civil and criminal fraud and assists agencies tasked with administering relief programs to prevent fraud by, among other methods, augmenting and incorporating existing coordination mechanisms, identifying resources and techniques to uncover fraudulent actors and their schemes, and sharing and harnessing information and insights gained from prior enforcement efforts. For more information on the department’s response to the pandemic, please visit <a href="https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">www.justice.gov/coronavirus</a>.</p>
<p>Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud affecting COVID-19 government relief programs can be reported by visiting the webpage of the Civil Division’s Fraud Section, which can be found <a href="https://www.justice.gov/civil/report-fraud" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">here</a>. Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can also report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline at 866-720-5721 or via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at: <a href="https://www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form</a>.</p>
<p>The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. </p>
<p> Attachment(s): <img title="application/pdf" src="https://www.justice.gov/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png"/> <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1587671/download" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Download Settlement Agreement</a>Topic(s): False Claims ActComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/civil/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Civil Division</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">USAO &#8211; Georgia, Northern</a>Press Release Number: 23-675 </p>
<p> Updated June 16, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/lab-billing-company-settles-false-claims-act-allegations-relating-unnecessary-respiratory> Original Article </a></p>

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke Delivers Remarks on Justice Department Findings of Civil Rights Violations by the Minneapolis Police Department and the City of Minneapolis
<p><strong><em>Remarks as Delivered</em></strong></p>
<p>Good morning. My name is Kristen Clarke. I’m the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice. At the heart of many of the protests that unfolded in this city, and across the nation, was a call for constitutional, fair and non-discriminatory policing and respect for people’s civil rights.</p>
<p>Today we are here to take an important step toward answering that call and committing to the task of building out a core feature of American democracy – an effective, accountable police department that ensures respect for constitutional rights, garners public trust and keeps people safe.</p>
<p>I want to provide further details about the findings of our civil rights investigation that the Attorney General just announced.</p>
<p>First, we found that the Minneapolis Police Department uses excessive force – both deadly and less lethal.</p>
<p>We reviewed MPD’s 19 police shootings and one in-custody death from January 1, 2016, to August 16, 2022. Many of these incidents were unconstitutional uses of deadly force. We found that officers used deadly force without probable cause to believe that there was an immediate threat of serious physical harm to the officer or another person. In one example, an off-duty officer fired his gun at a car containing six people within three seconds of getting out of his squad car.</p>
<p>Neck restraints are lethal force. And we found that MPD officers often use neck restraints without warning, on people suspected of only minor offenses and on people who posed no threat.</p>
<p>We also reviewed less lethal uses of force – tasers, bodily force and pepper spray.</p>
<p>MPD officers’ use of tasers often is inconsistent with MPD’s own policy and occurs without warning. For example, officers sometimes use multiple, successive taser applications without re-assessing the need for further activations, which can be dangerous. They also use tasers for minor offenses, on kids and on people known to have behavioral health issues.</p>
<p>We found that MPD unconstitutionally uses bodily force and pepper spray against people who have committed minor offenses or no offense at all. In addition, we saw repeated instances of excessive force against kids without appropriate attempts to de-escalate the situation. In one instance, an MPD officer wearing street clothes drew his gun and pinned a teenager to the hood of a car for allegedly taking a $5 burrito without paying.</p>
<p>In addition, we found instances where MPD officers did not adequately ensure the safety of people in their custody. For example, after pepper spraying a group of people who were fighting, MPD officers ignored pleas to call an ambulance for one woman who needed help because she had asthma. Disregarding the medical distress of a person who is in custody or after a use of force is unlawful.</p>
<p>And, often, officers who could have intervened to stop the use of excessive force by their colleagues did not do so. This violates the Constitution.</p>
<p>Our second finding is that the Minneapolis Police Department unlawfully discriminates against Black people in its enforcement activities. This is a first-time finding for us – that the police department also discriminates against Native American people in its enforcement activities.</p>
<p>With our statistical experts, we reviewed over five years of MPD data, from November 1, 2016, to August 9, 2022, on roughly 187,000 traffic and pedestrian stops. We also conducted interviews and ride-alongs, and we reviewed other documents and information that the city provided.</p>
<p>As part of this systemic discrimination, we found that MPD disproportionately stops Black people and Native American people.</p>
<p>During stops involving Black and Native American people, MPD performs searches more frequently than during stops involving white people, even when they behave in similar ways.</p>
<p>MPD also uses force during stops involving Black and Native American people more frequently than they do during stops involving white people, even when they behave in similar ways. This too is another “first” – this is the first time we have made a finding that the police department unlawfully discriminates by using force after stops against Black and Native American people.</p>
<p>Starting in late May 2020 – when George Floyd was killed – MPD officers suddenly ceased reporting race and gender in many stops despite MPD policy requiring them to collect this data. We estimate that the percentage of daily stops with known race data recorded dropped over 35 percentage points during this period. Still, our analyses of the reported racial data from May 25, 2020, to August 9, 2022, showed significant racial disparities in searches and use of force.</p>
<p>Working with our statistical experts, we did not find that there was a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for such different treatment for Black and Native American people during stops or the other enforcement activities that we examined.</p>
<p>We also found that the MPD violates people’s First Amendment rights by retaliating with force against people engaged in protests and engaged in demonstrations. We saw officers push and pepper spray protesters who posed no threat. Where protesters resisted police commands, officers used force to punish them well after any threat had ended. For example, during a protest in March of 2021, officers beat, kicked and shoved protestors even after they were restrained. One officer, used his full body weight, kneed a passive, restrained protester in the neck as he lay face down – an act that amounted to deadly force.</p>
<p>MPD retaliates against journalists and unlawfully restricts their access during protests. Under the First Amendment, the press must be allowed to safely gather and report the news.</p>
<p>In addition, we found that the police department retaliates against people who challenge or question them during stops and calls for service. The Constitution protects the right to criticize officers, even with profanity. We also found that MPD officers retaliate against people who observe and record them, even though they have a right to do so. All of this violates the law.</p>
<p>Our fourth and final finding is that MPD and the City of Minneapolis discriminate against people with behavioral health disabilities when responding to calls for assistance.</p>
<p>Many calls for service related to behavioral health do not require a law enforcement response. These calls often involve no violence, weapon or immediate threat. And in these circumstances, a law enforcement-led response can lead to trauma, injury and even death to people experiencing behavioral health issues. But these harms may be avoided by dispatching behavioral health responders where appropriate, and they can be mitigated by sending behavioral health responders with police where a law enforcement response may be needed.</p>
<p>To assess MPD’s and the city’s response to behavioral health calls, we analyzed a random sample of behavioral health-related 911 calls to which MPD responded. And we learned that MPD and the city often send the police unnecessarily and that people are harmed as a result. For the vast majority of the calls we reviewed, the person needing behavioral health attention was not reported to have a weapon or to pose an immediate threat. Only 0.45% of over 100,000 mental health calls resulted in an arrest at the scene – this underscores that the current reliance on police-only responses is unwarranted.</p>
<p>In December of 2021, the city launched a mobile crisis response pilot that provides a behavioral health response in addition to, or instead of, a police response. And that program is a step in the right direction, but that pilot effort lacks the capacity to promptly respond to calls throughout the city, and, as a result, MPD continues to be the primary response to behavioral health calls.</p>
<p>These findings are serious, and we enter the path to reform with a plan to put in place lasting and enduring changes that will ensure the constitutional, fair and non-discriminatory policing to which the people in this great city are entitled.</p>
<p>As I close, I want to extend my gratitude to the Mayor and the Police Chief for joining us today and for their collaboration. And I also want to extend deep appreciation to the people across Minneapolis who worked with us at every step of this process. Thanks to residents, community leaders, civil rights advocates, police officers and many others who used their voice in this process. An enormous and important task lies ahead, and we want this community to hear us clearly – we stand with you at every stage of this process that lays ahead.</p>
<p>I’ll turn the floor over to Ann Bildtsen, First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota.</p>
<p> Speaker: <a href="https://www.justice.gov/crt/meet-assistant-attorney-general" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke</a>Topic(s): Civil RightsComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/crt/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Civil Rights Division</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Civil Rights &#8211; Special Litigation Section</a> </p>
<p> Updated June 16, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-kristen-clarke-delivers-remarks-justice-department-findings> Original Article </a></p>

Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta Delivers Remarks on Justice Department Findings of Civil Rights Violations by the Minneapolis Police Department and the City of Minneapolis
<p><strong><em>Remarks as Delivered</em></strong></p>
<p>Thank you, Attorney General Garland. I want to thank the city and MPD for their cooperation with our investigation. And I want to express my sincere gratitude to the many, many community members who shared their experiences with us during the investigation.</p>
<p>We opened this investigation following the tragic murder of George Floyd three years ago. And what we found is a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct that has compromised MPD’s ability to serve and protect the people of Minneapolis. The findings laid out in today’s report are troubling.</p>
<p>I know this community is still hurting, and in today’s announcement may also open up old wounds. There is nothing that I can say today that will undo the wrongs of the past. But I can tell you the Justice Department is committed to working with Minneapolis on a path forward to constitutional policing and stronger police-community trust.</p>
<p>I want to acknowledge that the city and MPD have made some important changes already. They didn’t not wait for this report to start the reform process.</p>
<p>I am also pleased that the Justice Department and the city have reached an Agreement in Principle, in which we commit to negotiate a court-enforceable, independently monitored consent decree, to be filed in federal court. Through this Agreement, the city and MPD have shown their commitment to moving expeditiously on reforms aimed at remedying the problems that we’ve have identified. And I commend them for taking this step.</p>
<p>The consent decree will provide a pathway to lasting change in Minneapolis. In negotiating and developing the decree, we will seek input from community members, police officers and city employees. The consent decree will require a transparent reform process, so all of you can see evidence of change and evaluate progress for yourselves.</p>
<p>Through decades of experience, we have learned – and I have seen firsthand – that consent decrees can lead to real and lasting change. Most recently, our approach has led to significant improvement in Seattle, Albuquerque and Baltimore, including notable declines in use of force.</p>
<p>But consent decrees are only not the tool to achieve constitutional policing. The department also supports communities and law enforcement agencies through grant programs and technical assistance.</p>
<p>For example, we fund public safety and behavioral health partnerships aimed at reducing justice system involvement and diverting individuals with mental health or substance use disorders to treatment. Our grant funds are supporting the Minneapolis Behavioral Health and Wellness Clinic, which serves as a crisis stabilization and drop-off center for law enforcement officers to help divert individuals to care and away from arrest.</p>
<p>Before I close, I want to address the city’s settlement agreement with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR). The Justice Department’s investigation is separate and independent from the MDHR investigation.</p>
<p>MDHR investigated whether the city and MPD engaged in systemic discriminatory practices in violation of state law. In our investigation, we identified racial discrimination in violations of federal law. In addition, we investigated allegations of discrimination against people with disabilities, the use of excessive force and the police response to those involved in expressive activities, including members of the media. As I said earlier, we expect that we will negotiate a federal consent decree enforceable in federal court. MDHR’s court-enforceable agreement with the city has been filed in state court. We commit to working collaboratively with MDHR and the city with the shared goal of creating meaningful and sustainable reform for the people of Minneapolis.</p>
<p>To the men and women of MPD: We recognize the challenges you face, the difficulties of your job, here and across the country. We know that police officers risk their lives every day in the line of duty. And we know that the city and your command staff owe you the support and clear policies and training. And we know that you need the public’s trust to do your jobs effectively and keep your community safe.</p>
<p>To the people of Minneapolis: Police reform does not happen overnight, and it does not happen without you. It will take time, focused effort and sustained commitment. In the months ahead, we will need this entire community to help us craft solutions that will result in real and lasting change here in Minneapolis. Together we can build a Minneapolis that protects the rights, safety and dignity of all.</p>
<p>I will now welcome Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke, to discuss the findings of our investigation in greater detail.</p>
<p> Speaker: <a href="https://www.justice.gov/asg/staff-profile/meet-associate-attorney-general" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Vanita Gupta, Associate Attorney General</a>Topic(s): Civil RightsComponent(s): <a href="http://www.justice.gov/crt/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Civil Rights Division</a><a href="http://www.justice.gov/asg/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Office of the Associate Attorney General</a> </p>
<p> Updated June 16, 2023<a href=https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/associate-attorney-general-vanita-gupta-delivers-remarks-justice-department-findings> Original Article </a></p>