Case 2:18-cr-00374-JFB-AKT Document 1 Filed 07/24/18 Page

Case 2:18-cr-00374-JFB-AKT Document 1 Filed 07/24/18 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1

CCC:JAM F. #2018R00779

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

---------------------------X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

-ag~inst-

STEVEN PAGARTANIS,

Defendant.

---------------------------X THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:

FILED tN CLERK'S OFFICE

U,S, DISTRICT COURT E;C.N,Y,

*· JUL 241811 * LONG tSbAN9 SFFICE

INDICTMENT

Cr. No. C R 1 8 3 7 4· (T. 15, U.S.C., §§ 78j(b) and78ff; T. 18, U.S.C., §§ 981(a)(l)(C), 982(a)(I), 982{b)(l), 1343, 1349, 1956(a)(l)(B)(i), 19S6(h), 1957, 2 and ~55.1 ~SQ.; T. 21, U.S.C., § 853(p); T. 28, V.S.C., § 2461(c))

HURLEY,J.

LINDSAY, M.J. INTRODUCTION

At all times relevant to tms Indicbnent, unless otherwise indicated:

I. The Defendant and the Companies

1. The defendant STEVEN. PAGARTANIS was a licensed securities

broker-dealer who solicited individuals to invest in vari_able annllities, mutual funds and

similar investment vehicles. The defendant owned and operated Omega Planning

Associates, Inc. ("Omegat'), a New York State corporation that maintained an office in East

Setauk~t, New York~

2. The defendant STEVEN PAGAR.TANIS was also the Chief Executive

Officer or Registered Agent for at least five other corporate entities in East Setauket, New

York, including Genesis I Hol~s, LLC ("Genesls") and Sonesta Holdings, Inc.

("Sonesia"). PAGART ANIS and his wife were also the beneficiaries of the Kinico Land


Trust ("Kinico"), which held residential properties in New York. The address of record for

Genesis, Sonesta, .Kinico and related entities was approximately one mile frc;,m ·the Omega

office.

3. The defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS created and held bank

2

accollllts in the names Qf Omega, Genesis, Sonesta, Kinico and related entities at Capital One

Bank branches in Suffolk County, New York (collectively, the "Bank Accounts"). Investor

money was regularly deposited into and withdrawn from the Bank Accounts, and investor

money was also wired to and transferred from the Bank Accounts.

4. Capital One Bank was headquartered in McLean, Virginia All Capital

One Bank wire transfers were done through servers located in Richmond, Virgini-.

Il. The Fraud Scheme Victims

S. In or about and between January 2000 and. March 2018, both .dates

being app-oximate and inclusive, at least 17 individuals (th~ ''Victims") collectively invested

more than $13 million with the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS, purportedly for real

estate-related investments. The Victims sustained actual losses·of more than $8 million.

lnfomtation regarding some of the Victims is set forth below.

6. Jane. Doe #1, a resident of Brick, New Jersey, whose identity is known

to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAOARTANIS approximately $710,000 to

invest and sustained actual losses of approximately $280,200.

7. Jane Doe #2, a resident of Plainfield, Illii1ois, whose identity is known

to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS approximately $2()0,000 to

invest and sustained no actual losses.


8. Jane Doe #3, a resident of Riverhead, New York, whose identity is

known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS approximately

$1,000,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of approximately $418,000.

9. Jane Doe #4, a resident of Rocky Poin~ New York; whose identity is

known to the Grand Jury,· gave the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS approximately

$450,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of approximately $297,000.

10. Jane Doe #5, a resident of Lake Grove, New Yo~ whose identity is

known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAOART ANIS approximately

$500,000 to invest and sustained no actual losses.

11. Jane Doe #6, a resident ofNew York, New York, whose identity is

known to the (irand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS approximately

$1,000,000 to invest and sustained no actual losses.

12. Jane Doe #7, a resident ofVal"ncia, California, whose identity is

kn9wn to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS approximately

$755,000 to invest and sustained no actual losses.

13. Jane Doe #8, a resident of Fort Meye(S, Florida, whose identity is

known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS approximately

$255,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of approximately $200,000.

14. Jane Doe #9, a resident of East Meadow, New York, whose identity is

known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS approximately

$3,793,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of approximately $2,300,000.

3


15. Jane.Doe #10, a resident of North BabylQn, New YoJ:~ whose identity

is known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGAR.TANIS approximately

$3,052,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of approximately $3,013,101.

16. Jane Doe #11 and John Doe #1, residents of West H~mp~New

York, whose· identities are knQwn ~ the Grand Jury, gave ~e defen~ant STEVEN

P ~OART ANIS ~proximately $230,771 to ·invest and sustained actual losses of $230,771.

17. Jane Doe #12, a resident of Holtsville, New York, whose identity is

known to the Grai,.d Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN P1',GARTANIS approximately

$l16,,143 t<> investand sustuned actual losses of$86S,143.

18. Ja11e Doe #13 and John Doe ·#2, residents of.Manorville,. New York,

whose identities~· known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS

approximately $150,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of$.150,00Q.

19. . Jane Doe #14 and John Doe #3, residents of Nesco~~ New York,

whose identitie$ are known to the Grand Jury, gave the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS

approximately $285,000 to invest and sustained actual losses of $285,000.

Ill. The Fraudulent Scheme

20. In or about and between -January 2000 and March 2018, both dates

bt;ing appro)tjmate and inclusive, the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS, together with

-others,. devised, implemented, supervised and execµted a scheme to ftaudulently induce the

Vi.ctims, including. Jane Doe # 1 through Jane Doe #14,.John Doe #1 thro~ John.Doe #3,

and Q~, to invest :money with PAGARTANIS. It was a part of the scheme to defraud that

PAGART ANIS told the Victims that their capital would be invested in legitimate real estau>.-

4


5

related investments, including a publicly traded Canadian land development company based

in Calgary ("Company l ''). In exchange for their inve.stm~,its, the de.fe~t typically. told

tb..e Vic~ that their capital would earn a fIXed percentage return, generally between 4.5 and

8 percent annually. The defendant represented to certain ViCUDlS that the pmported

investnients were ,imilar to bonds or fixed income investments, while re.presenting to other

Vjctims tlµit they were investing in the common stock of Company 1. To induce the Victims

to inv~ the defendant provide4 them with publicly availabl~ literature regarding Company

1 :from tb.e. Internet

21. However, rather than investing ·in Company 1 and other investments as

promised tc) the Victims, the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS used ~e investment capital

to repy prior inv~stors and for his own personal benefit. For example, PAGART ANIS used

the Victims~- inveStment capital to pay for his personal and.family eX'.pe11$CS; and to l)Ule~

luxury items such as clothing, jewelry, airline tickets, massages and cigars. In addition,. the

·defendant retmned what purported to be investor principal ·and· interest payments by utilizing

funds received from new investors, including the Victims, to directly _pay previous investors.

22. As part of the scheme.; the. defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS

establis~ and utilized a network of shell entities and accounts in the names of entities that

-appeared to be affiliated with Company 1 and a hotel management company based in BostQD;

Massachusetts ("Company 2"), which, in fact, had no legitimate relationships with Company

1 ~ Company 2, Neither Company I nor Company 2 had any relationship or affiliation

with PAGARTANIS or any entities that he ~ntrolled.


6

23. To induce the Victims to invest, and to prevent the Victims.from.

attempting to withdraw their investments~ the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS, together

with. others,. made and caused to l>e made ~terially false and fraudulent representations to

the Victims using intemate·wire communications,·mcluding telephone·calls and e-mails.

PAGAR!ANIS also provided the Victims with forged and fabricated accoun~ statements that

purportedly showed the value of the Victims' investments in Company 1 stock. These

fraudulent account stateinents and other fraudulent documents were variously inailed,

electroni~y mailed and band-delivered to the Victims.

COUNTONE (Securities·Fraud)

24. The.allegations contained in ~p~ one through 23 are realleged.

and in~rated as. if fully set forth in this paragraph.

25. In or about and between January 2000 and March 2018, both dates.

being ·approximate and inclusive; within the Eastern District of New York and elsewhere, the

defen<lant STEVEN PAGARTANIS, together with others, did knowingly and.willfully use

and employ one or more-manipulative and deceptive devices and contrivances, cp$81y tQ

Rule I Ob-5 of the Rules and Regulations of the United States Securities and Exchange

Commission, Tille 17, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 240. IOb-.S,. by: (a) employing,

one or inore devices, schemes and artifices to defraud; (b) ·Diaking one or more untrue

statements of.material fact and omining to state one or more material facts necessary m order

to make the- statements made, iil the light of the circumstances in which they were made, not

misleading;. and (c) engaging in one or ·more· acts, practices and cour$es of busi~ss which


would and did operate as a fraud and deceit upon one or more investors and potential

investors in Company 1, in connection with the purcha.se and sale of invesu.nents in

~mpany 1, directly and indirectly, by use of means and instrumentalities of interstate

commerce and the mails.

1

(Title 15, United States Code, Sections 78j(b) and 78ff; Title 18, United States

Code,: Sections 2 and 3551 erg.)

COUNTTWO (Conspiracy to C(>mmitMail and \Vue Fraud)

26. The allegations contained in paragraphs one through 23 are realleged.

and incorporated as if fully setfo~ in this paragraph.

27. In.or about and between January 2000 and March 2018, both dates

being approximate and inclusive~ within the Eastern District of New York and elsewh~; the

defendant STEVEN PAGAR.T ANIS, togethet with others, 4,id kn9wingly and intentionally

conspire .to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud the Victhns,-and to obtain money and

pt<>perty from the Victims by means of materially. false· and:fraudulent pretenses,

representations and promises, and;: for the p~O$e 9f.~uting suQ.h schem~ ~artifice, (a).

to pl~ in authotized d~siiories for mail matter one or more matters and.things to be sent

and.delivered by the United States Postal Service, and to cause to·be ~osi~ one or more

matters; and things to be sent and delivered by private and commercial interstate caniets, and

taken and ~ved therefrom one or more such matters, contrary to Title 18, United St.ates

Code, Section 1341; and (b) to transmit and cause to be.transmi~ by m~ ofwire


communication in interstate. and·foreign comm~rce, one or more writings, signs, signals,

pictures and sounds, contracy. to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1349 and 3551 et~.)

. COUNT THREE (Conspiracy to·Co~t Money Laundering)

28. The allegations contained in paragraphs one through 23 are realleged

and incorporated as if fully set forth in this paragraph.

29. In. or abo~t-and between JJm~ 2013 and March 2018, both dates

8

being.approximate and inclusive, within the Eastern District of°New York and elsewhere, the

defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS, together with others, did knowingly and intentionally

conspire: (a) to conduct ~d-~ to conduct o~ or more financial tnmsactions in and

aff~g i~terstate commerce, which transactions in fact involved the proceeds. of one of

more ~ified. unlawful activiti~s, to. wit: mail ~u.d, ~ vio1-tion Qf Tltle 18, Um.ted S41tes

Code, SectiQn 1341, wire ft@d, in violation_of'Title 18~ United States Code~. Section 1343,

and securities fraud,_ in violation of Title 15, United States Code, Sections 78j(b) and 7.8ff,

knowing that the property involved in suQh financial ~tions ~resen~.the proceeds of·

some form of unlawful ~vity, and knowing·tbat such transactions-were designed in whole

and in part to conceal and disguise the-nature, the location, the source,·the Qwnership and the

control of the proceeds of ~tied •wfu.lac_tivity, con~ to Title 18, United States.

Code; .Section 19S6(a)(l )(B)(i); and (b) to engage and attempt to engage. in one or more

monetary transactions in and affecting interstate coDllllerce.in criminally derived property -of

a ·value greater than $10,000 du¢ was derived D'QPl one or more specified ~awful activities,.


9

to wil: -mai• fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1'341, wire fraud, in

violation ofTitie 18, United States Code, Section 1343, and securities fraud, in violation of

Title 15, United States Code, Sections 78j(b) and 78ft knowing that the property involved in

such monetary transactions represented.the ·proceeds of some form of unlawful activity,

contrary to Title 18, U~ Sm.tes .Code, Section 1957(a).

(Thie 18, United States Cod¢, Sections 1956(h). and 3551. ~ ~-)

COONTFOUR (BJJgagU,lg -~ Unlawful Monetary T~ons)

30. The allegations contained in paragraphs one through 23 are tealleged

and incorporated as .if fully set forth in this paragraph.

31. On or-about.February 13, 2017, within the·EastemDistrictofNew

York ~d elsewh~, the-defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS~ together with others, did

knowingly and intentionally engage and attenipt .t<> engage .in one or ~ore 1110netary

trQnsactions in and aiJecting interstate co~ in criminally derived property of a value

greater than $10,000 that was derived from one or mote specified unlawful activities,. to wit

mail fraud, :in violation of Ti.tie 18, Utiited States Code;.$.~on 1341., wlt'.e {faµd, in viQl~o,n

of Title 18, United Suites Code; Section 1343, and securities :fraud, in violation of Title 15~

United States Code, Sections 78j(b ).and 78ft; knowing .that th~ property involved in SUQh

transactions represented the proceeds of some form of unlawi\4 activity.

(ritle 1.8, United States Code, Sections 1957, 2 and.35S1.,ma.)


COUNTFIVE (Money Laundering)



33. On or about February 15, 2017, within the Eastern District of New

10

York and elsewhere, the defendant STEVEN PAGARTANIS, together with others, did

knowingly and intentionally conduct and attempt to conduct one or more financial

transactions affecting interstate commerce, which transactions involved the proceeds of one

or more specified unlawful activities, to wit: mail fraud, in violation of Title 18, United

States Code, Section 1341, wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section

1343, and secwities fraud, in violation of Title 15, United States Code, Section 78j(b) and

78ff, knowing that the property involved in such financial transactions represented the

proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, and knowing that such transactions were

designed in whole and in part to conceal and disguise the nature, the locati_on, the source, the

ownership and the control of the proceeds of the specified unlawful activity.

(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1956(a){l)(B)(i), 2 and 3551 et seq.)

COUNTS SIX THROUGH NINE (Wire Fraud)



35. On or about the dates set forth below, within the Eastern District of

New York and elsewhere, the defendant STEVEN PAGART ANIS, together with others, did

knowingly and intentionally devise a scheme and artifice to defraud the Victims, and to


11

obtain money and property from the Victims by means of materially false and fraudulent

pretenses, representations and promises, and, for the purpose of executing such scheme and

artifice, transmitted and caused to be transmitted one or more writings, signs, signals,

pictures and sounds by means of wire communication in interstate and foreign commerce, to

wit:

Count· Approximate Date Victim Description of Wire Transmission ofW-u-e

Transmission

SIX 'March 27, 2014 JaneDoe#9 $4()3,000 wue transf~r from a Qenesis banlc account at Capital One Banlc in Suffolk County ~-New York, through a server in Richmond, Virginia,. to a Sonesta bank account at Capital One Bank in Suffolk County, New York

SEVEN November 29, 2016 JaneDoe#ll SZS,000 wire transfer :from a Genesis banlc account at Capital One B• in Suffolk Cou~.ty,. New York, through a server in Richmond, Virginia, to a Sonesta bank accouilt at Capital One Bank in Suffolk County, New York

EIGHT February 13, 2017 JaneDoe#ll $12,000 wire tralisfer from a Genesis hank account at Capital One. Bank in Suffolk County~ New York, thrQugh a server in Richmond, Virginia, w a Sonesta bank account at Capital One Baille in Suffolk County, New York

NINE. February 14, 2017 JaneD.oe#ll $11,084 wire transfer from a Sonesta bank account at Capital One Balilc in Suffolk County, New York, thrQugh a server in RichmQnd, Virginia,. to pay the credit card bi.11 of PAGARTi\NIS's fanilly member~ Suffolk County, New York

(fide 18, United States Code, Sections 1343, 2 and 3S51 e~g.)


CRIMiNAL.FORFEITURE. ALLEGATION AS TO COUNTS ONE, TWO AND SIX 1HROUGHNINE

36. The United States hereby gives notice to the defendant that, upon his

conviction of any or the offenses charged in CoUlits One, Two and Six through Nine, the

govenu,ient· will ~k forfeiture in accordance with Title 18, United- S~esCode, Section

981(a)(l)(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section 246l(c), which require any person

convicted qf such offenses-to forfeit any property, real or personal, ·constituting, or derived

from, proceeds obtained directly or indirectly as a result of such offenses ..

12

37. If any of the above-described forfeitable pi"Qperty, as a result of any act

or olllission of the d~fendant:

(a) cai11lot be located upon. the exercise of due dilig~nce;

(b) has been transferred or sold to, or deposited ·with, a tbitd p~;

(c) has been pl~(f beyond ·the j~ction of the cou,t;

(d) has been substantially diminished in value; or

( e) has been coDimingled with other property, which cannot be

divided wid.iout di.fliculty;

it is the intent ofthe United States, pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p)"

to seek forfeiture of any other property of the defendant up to -the, value of·the forfe.itable

property described in thi$ for.feiture a,lle.g~on.

(Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(l)(C); Title 21~: United States

Code, Section 853(p); Title 28, United States Code; Secti()n 2461(c))


13

ClUMJNAL-fORFEITlJI.IB ALLEGATlON AS TO COUNTS THREE THROUGH FIVE·

38. The United States hereby gives notice to the. defendant that;, upon-his ·

conviction of any of the offenses cblµ"ged in Counts Three through Five, the gQvemment wUl

seek forfeiture.in accordance with Title 18, United States Code~ Section 982(a)(l), which

reqwre$: ~y p~rso~ CQnvicted. of·such off~s tQ forfeit .. y ptQ~rty,.,re$1 or·~rsona.l,

jnvolved in such offenses, or-any property traceable to such property.

39. If any of the above-described forfeitable p~perty, as a result of any act

or otni$Sion of the defendant:

(~) cannot be located upon.the exercise of due diligence;

Q)) has been transferred, or sold to. or deposited; with a third_party;

( C) has ·been placed beyo~d the juri$dicuon of the ~urt;,

(d) bas been substantially diminisbl?Xl in value; or

(e) has been commingled with other property wbicb cannoJ. be·

divided•·without··difticulty;

it is the-intent of the United. States, pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Section ·853(p ),

as incotporated by Title 18, United States Code, Section 982Q> )(1 ), to seelc fotf~iture of any


other property of the defendant up to the value of the forfeitable property described in this

forfeiture. allegation.

(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 982(aX1) and 982(b)(l); Title 21,

Uni1ed States Code, Section 8S3(p))

RICHARD P. DONOGUE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

B~~ ~ i, •~ Ac'irlTEDeilTTOR~ PYBSUANT IQ 2§ C,f,B Q.136

ATRUEBILL

/!kiJA c::/ FOREPERSOW

14


' .,

F .#: 2018R00779 FORMDBD-34 JUN. 8S

No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN District of NEW YORK

CRIMINAL DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs.

STEVEN PAGARTANIS,

Defendant.

INDICTMENT (T. 15, U.S.C., §§ 78j(b) and 78ff; T. 18, U.S.C., §§ 98l(a)(l)(C),

982(a)(I), 982(b)(l), 1343, 1349, 1956(a)(l)(B)(i), l 956(h), 1957, 2 and 3551 et seq.; T. 21, U.S.C., § 853(p); T. 28, U.S.C., § 246l(c))

-- Atruebill. - . . . _____________ ck~ . Fo rson

Filed in open court t/iis __________ _______ day.

of ____________ A.D.20 ____ _

---------------------------------------Clerk

Bail, $ __________ _

Artie McConnell, Assistant U.S. Attorney (631) 715-7825

Case 2:18-cr-00374-JFB-AKT Document 1-1 Filed 07/24/18 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 16

1.

2.

INFORMATION SHEET

IN Flf ... ~D 11.s. o,sf LER1<·s .. R1cr ca8'" Fie,: * Rrt:.b-N

JUL 24 1· . Y. ~'OtlJ ,,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUKfONG ISL.A ~· EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ND OFF/CE

CR 18 374 Title of Case: United States v. Steven Pagartanis HUPIFY,J.

Related Magistrate Docket Number(s): __ N ___ /A _______________ ~--.....-.-LINDSAY, M.J.

3. Arrest Date: NIA ______ ............;;; _____________________ _ 4. Nature of offense(s): ~ Felony

• Misdemeanor

5. Related Cases - Title and Docket No(s). (Pursuant to Rule 50.3.2 of the Local E.D.N.Y. Division of Business Rules): _______________ _

6. Projected Length of Trial: Less than 6 weeks ~

More than 6 weeks • 7. County in which crime was allegedly committed: ..... S ....... uf __ fo ..... l __ k ____________ _

(Pursuant to Rule 50.l{d) of the Local E.D.N.Y. Division of Business Rules)

8. Was any aspect of the investigation, inquiry and prosecution giving rise to the case pending or initiated before March 10, 2012. 1 D Yes IZI No

9. Has this indictment/information been ordered sealed? IZI Yes • No

10. Have arrest warrants been ordered? IZI Yes • No

11. Is there a capital count included in the indictment? • Yes ~ No

By:

RICHARDP.DONOGHUE UNIT TES ATTORNEY

e McConnell Assistant U.S. Attorney (631) 715-7825

Judge Brodie will not accept cases that were initiated before March 10, 2012.

Rev. 10/04/12

Case 2:18-cr-00374-JFB-AKT Document 1-2 Filed 07/24/18 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 17

TO: Clerk's Office UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

APPLICATIONFORLEAVE FILED TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEt':'s. d~-rh~~drf 1-t~o.N.Y.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• * JUL 2 4 2018 * -v.-

Docket Number

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

SUBMITTED BY: Plaintiff_ Defendant_ DOJ _L Name: Artie McConnell Finn Name:U.S. Attorney's Office Address: 610 Federal Plaza

Central Islip. New York 11722 Phone Number: 631-715-7825 E-Mail Address:[email protected]

INDICATE UPON THE PUBLIC DOCKET SHEET: YES NO ✓ If yes, state description of document to be entered on docket sheet:

MANDATORY CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE:

A) lfpunuant to a prior Court Order: Docket Number of Case in Which Entered: ______ _

. Judge/Magistrate Judge:'-------------4 Date Entered: _______________ _

B) If a nm appUcation, the statute, regulation, or other legal basis that authorizes filing under seal

ORDERED SEALED AND PLACED IN THE CLE~'S OF?JCE..--.. AND MAY NO~ BE UNSEALED u~s O~D}'V···:'i,IE· ~ .

TH~U 'i>'1Jalf(I~ /I .. ,,· . '.°•

DA : Broo .•. ,-"i""'\e~\ S ~ · ~(\eJv . . . · '. :~ ·-,: C V ., • .- Q_ -···•···· '· '::) -;-::;,~~...,-.. _ . ..

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGFJU.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

RECEIVED IN CLERK'S OFFICE ________ _ DATE

A.)_ A copy of this application either has been or will be promptly served upon all parties to this action, B.) _ Service is excused by 31 U.S.C. 3730(b). or by the following other statute or regulation: • or C.) __ This is a criminal document submitted, and flight public safety, or security are significant concerns. (Check one)

DATE SIGNATURE

Documents

Case 2:18-cr-00374-JFB-AKT Document 1 Filed 07/24/18 Page