Information for Victims in Large Cases
|Case Name||Familiar Names and Terms||District or Division||Overview|
|United States v. Kristopher Lee Dallmann et al.||Kristopher Lee Dallmann, Darryl Julius Polo a/k/a djppimp, Douglas M. Courson, Felipe Garcia, Jared Edward Jaurequi a/k/a Jared Edwards, Peter H. Huber, Yoany Vaillant a/k/a Yoany Vaillant Fajardo, and Luis Angel Villarino||USAO - Virginia, Eastern||
Eight individuals, including Kristopher Lee Dallmann and Darryl Julius Polo, have been charged with conspiring to violate federal criminal copyright law by running an entity called Jetflicks, an online, subscription-based service headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, that permitted users to stream and, at times, download copyrighted television programs without the permission of the relevant copyright owners. According to the indictment, the defendants reproduced tens of thousands of copyrighted television episodes without authorization and made these infringing programs available to tens of thousands of paid subscribers located throughout the U.S. At one point, Jetflicks claimed to have more than 183,200 different television episodes. One of the defendants, Polo, left Jetflicks and created a competing site based in Las Vegas called iStreamItAll (ISIA) that at one point claimed to have 118,479 different television episodes and 10,980 individual movies. Like Jetflicks, ISIA offered content for a regular subscription fee to viewers around the United States, and ISIA publicly asserted that it had more content than Netflix, Hulu, Vudu and Amazon Prime. In addition, the two services were not only available to subscribers over the internet but specifically designed to work on many different types of devices, platforms and software including numerous varieties of computer operating systems, smartphones, tablets, smart televisions, video game consoles, digital media players, set-top boxes and web browsers.?
Both Jetflicks and ISIA allegedly obtained infringing works from pirate websites around the world—including some of the globe’s biggest torrent and Usenet sites specializing in unauthorized content such as The Pirate Bay, RARBG, and TorrentDay—using automated computer scripts to locate, download, process, and store the illegal files, and then quickly make that content available on servers in Canada to United States subscribers for streaming and/or downloading. Essentially, Jetflicks and ISIA were two of the largest streaming services in the United States but did not compensate copyright owners for streaming and making available for download the unauthorized works they offered to their paid subscribers.
Besides the conspiracy charge, Dallmann has been charged with additional counts of criminal copyright infringement as well as money laundering in connection with Jetflicks, and Polo faces similar additional charges in connection with ISIA. More information can be found in the DOJ press release.
|United States v. Capt Neill’s Seafood, Inc. and Phillip R. Carawan||USAO - North Carolina, Eastern||
Charges: Lacey Act (false labeling) and aiding and abetting,?16 U.S.C. §§ 3372(d)(1) and (2), and 3373(d)(3)(A)(i) and (ii), 18 U.S.C. § 2
On June 27, 2019, the Eastern District of North Carolina filed charges against defendants PHILLIP R. CARAWAN and CAPT. NEILL’S SEAFOOD, INC. ?The charges allege that between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, both CARAWAN and CAPT. NEILL’S SEAFOOD, INC. mislabeled jumbo lump crab meat as “Product of the USA” when, in fact, it was crab meat purchased from foreign countries, repackaged, and falsely labeled. ?The defendants sold the mislabeled crab meat to a number of different wholesalers and retailers.
For a more details, see the Joint Factual Statement on the district website above.
|US v. Robert Boling, Jr. et al.||Robert Wayne Boling Jr., Fredrick Brown, Trorice Crawford, Allan Albert Kerr, and Jongmin Seok||USAO - Texas, Western||
Five individuals have been charged with coordinating an identify-theft and fraud scheme targeting service members, their dependents, and veterans. The defendants are alleged to have used the stolen personal identifying information (PII) of thousands of military members to access Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs benefits sites and steal millions of dollars.?
The defendants’ identity-theft and fraud scheme began in 2014 when Fredrick Brown allegedly stole thousands of military members’ PII, including names, dates of birth, social security numbers, and Department of Defense identification numbers. He is alleged to have then provided the stolen information to Robert Boling, Jr., who exploited the information in various ways together with his Philippines-based co-defendants Allan Kerr and Jongmin Seok. Boling, Kerr, and Seok specifically used the stolen information to compromise a Department of Defense portal designed to enable military members to access benefits information online. Once through the portal, the defendants are alleged to have accessed benefits information. ?Access to these detailed records enabled the defendants to steal or attempt to steal millions of dollars from military members’ bank accounts. The defendants also stole veterans’ benefits payments. After the defendants had compromised military members’ bank accounts and veterans’ benefits payments, Boling allegedly worked with Trorice Crawford to recruit individuals who would accept the deposit of stolen funds into their bank accounts and then send the funds through international wire remittance services to the defendants and others.
|Rosanne Day, et al||Rosanne Day, Robert Paul Davis, Genevieve Renee Frappier, and Miles Kelly||USAO - Nevada||
The indictment alleges that PacNet, under the defendants' direction, was the payment processor of choice for companies that mailed large volumes of fraudulent notifications designed to mislead victims into falsely believing they would receive a large amount of money, a valuable prize, or specialized psychic services upon payment of a fee. From 1994 until September 22, 2016, PacNet served as the middleman between banks and the fraudulent mailers - aggregating the checks, cash, and credit card payments collected by its clients, depositing the payments into PacNet-controlled bank accounts, and then distributing the funds as directed by the clients, according to the indictment. The notifications that induced the payments processed by PacNet were false - the victims who submitted the fees did not receive a large amount of money, a valuable prize, or specialized psychic services, according to the indictment. Many alleged victims were elderly or otherwise vulnerable, according to the indictment.
|United States v. Dino Paolucci||USAO - Pennsylvania, Eastern||
The defendant, Dino Paolucci, was charged with wire fraud and securities fraud in connection with his involvement in promoting a stock manipulation scheme, commonly referred to as a “pump and dump.”?
|United States v. Douglas Gordon||FindrareDVDs.com, Lostmoviesfound.com, Lostmoviefinder.com, Edge Video (in Maine), Everex (in Maine), Douglas Gordon, also known as “Doug”||USAO - Maine||
The first two counts of a three-count superseding indictment charge Douglas Gordon, a former co-owner of a chain of Edge Video movie rental stores in Maine, with willfully infringing copyrights of motion pictures by reproducing and distributing counterfeit DVD copies of movies in 2014 and 2016.? The third count of the indictment charges the defendant with engaging in a mail fraud scheme from about April, 2014 to about January, 2019.? He is further charged in the third count with having established FindrareDVDs (FRD), Lostmoviesfound (LMF) and Lostmoviefinder (LMFinder) websites to advertise the sale of more than 100 motion pictures in DVD format.? The FRD, LMF and LMFinder websites allegedly misled customers about the quality of DVD versions of motion pictures and accepted “Mail in” orders as well as “On-line” orders.? The indictment alleges customers had expectations based on false representations and material omissions on the websites of receiving an authentic motion picture in a DVD format of good quality.? For the purpose of executing or attempting to execute the scheme to defraud, the Defendant is alleged to have received very large numbers of customer orders for DVDs of motion pictures and to have knowingly caused to be delivered by mail, burned DVD copies of movies of inferior quality, or did aid and abet the same.
|U.S. v. Pigida et al||Vladimir Pigida, Marina Ixora||USAO - Washington, Western||
Volodimyr Pigida and Marina Bondartenko are charged with operating a Ponzi scheme through their business Trend Sound Promoter.? Through the scheme, defendants are alleged to have caused more than $11 million is losses.?? They are further alleged to have fraudulently used proceeds from their scheme for their own benefit, to include the purchase of houses and vehicles.? Finally, the charges allege that the defendants committed fraud by hiding assets and transactions in connection with Trend Sound Promoter’s bankruptcy proceeding.
|US v Rust et al.||Gaylen Dean Rust, Denise Gunderson Rust, Joshua Daniel Rust||USAO - Utah||
Alleged scheme to defraud investors by inducing them to purchase investments in a fraudulent silver trading program.? All three defendants are charged with wire fraud conspiracy in the first count of the indictment and money laundering conspiracy in the second count.? Gaylen Rust is also charged with two counts of securities fraud.? Denise Rust and Joshua Rust are each charged with one count of money laundering.
|U.S. v. Nicole Rogers||USAO - North Dakota||
According to the indictment, Nicole Rogers obtained stolen mail containing credit cards, checks, and personal identifying information belonging to others.? Nicole Rogers deposited or attempted to deposit the stolen checks into her account.
|United States vs. Edgar Del Rio and Patti A. Kern||USAO - Nevada||
The information allege that Patti Kern and Edgar Del Rio conspired to defraud more than $1.5 million from senior citizens using a prize promotion scam. Between May 2011 and February 2018, Kern and others carried-out a direct-mail prize scam targeting seniors. The mailings were made to appear as if they came from sophisticated companies and misled victims to believe they would receive large sums of money, if they paid a relatively small fee, typically $20.00. None of the victims who sent a fee in response to the mailing ever received a large cash prize.