Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-NV  2:19-cr-00295
Case Name:   USA v. Castro et al
  Press Releases:
LAS VEGAS, Nev. – U.S. Attorney Nicholas A. Trutanich for the District of Nevada joined Attorney General William P. Barr, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, and Chief Postal Inspector Gary R. Barksdale today in announcing the largest coordinated sweep of elder fraud cases in history.  Over the past year, prosecutors charged more than 400 defendants, far surpassing the 260 defendants charged in cases as part of last year’s sweep.  In each case, offenders allegedly engaged in financial schemes that targeted or largely affected seniors.  In total, the charged elder fraud schemes caused alleged losses of over a billion dollars.

Among the individuals prosecuted in the District of Nevada over the past year:

U.S. v. Castro et al: Mario Castro, Jose Salud Castro, Salvador Castro, Miguel Castro, Jose Luis Mendez, and Andrea Burrow were charged with running a fraudulent mass-mailing scheme that defrauded hundreds of thousands of consumers into paying more than $10 million in fees for falsely promised cash prizes.

U.S. v. Day et al: Rosanne Day, Robert Paul Davis, Genevieve Renee Frappier, and Miles Kelly, all of whom were executives at PacNet Services Ltd, a payment processing company based in Vancouver, Canada, were charged with engaging in a massive fraud scheme in which PacNet processed payments for companies that mailed fraudulent notifications to consumers in the United States and worldwide.

U.S. v. Marcks et al: Gina Marcks, Ladda Boonlert, Charles Hill, Wendi A. Maryniak, and Roger Bond, all of Las Vegas, were charged in a 22-count indictment relating to an India-based telemarketing and email marketing conspiracy that targeted seniors. The defendants allegedly obtained over $2.4 million from victims residing throughout the United States.

“Americans are fed up with the constant barrage of scams that maliciously target the elderly and other vulnerable citizens,” said Attorney General William P. Barr.  “This year, the Department of Justice prosecuted more than 400 defendants, whose schemes totaled more than a billion dollars.  I want to thank the men and women of the department’s Consumer Protection Branch, which coordinated this effort, and all those in the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and Criminal Division who worked tirelessly to bring these cases.  The department is committed to stopping the full range of criminal activities that exploit America’s seniors.”

U.S. Attorney Trutanich stated:  “The District of Nevada appreciates the opportunity to contribute to the Department’s Elder Justice Initiative, which has been producing significant results. Going forward, our office will continue aggressively prosecuting criminals who target seniors, as well as conducting outreach sessions to raise awareness and providing guidance to help recognize financial fraud schemes.

This interactive map provides state by state information on the elder fraud cases and education and prevention community outreach efforts highlighted by today’s sweep announcement.  

Elder Fraud Hotline

Attorney General Barr also announced the launch of a National Elder Fraud Hotline, which will provide services to seniors who may be victims of financial fraud.  The Hotline will be staffed by experienced case managers who can provide personalized support to callers.  Case managers will assist callers with reporting the suspected fraud to relevant agencies and by providing resources and referrals to other appropriate services as needed.  When applicable, case managers will complete a complaint form with the Federal Bureau of Investigation Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) for Internet-facilitated crimes and submit a consumer complaint to the Federal Trade Commission on behalf of the caller.  The Hotline’s toll free number is 833-FRAUD-11 (833-372-8311).

For the second year, the Department of Justice and its law enforcement partners also took comprehensive action against the money mule network that facilitates foreign-based elder fraud. Generally, perpetrators use a “money mule” to transfer fraud proceeds from a victim to ringleaders of fraud schemes who often reside in other countries. Some of these money mules act unwittingly, and intervention can effectively end their involvement in the fraud. The FBI and the Postal Inspection Service took action against over 600 alleged money mules nationwide by conducting interviews, issuing warning letters, and bringing civil and criminal cases. Agents and prosecutors in more than 85 federal district participated in this effort to halt the money flow from victim to fraudster. These actions against money mules were in addition to the criminal and civil cases announced as part of this year’s elder fraud sweep.

These outreach efforts have helped to prevent seniors from falling prey to scams and have frustrated offenders’ efforts to obtain even more money from vulnerable elders.

The charges announced today are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

# # #

LAS VEGAS, Nev. – Six Las Vegas, Nevada area residents were charged with running a fraudulent mass-mailing scheme that tricked hundreds of thousands of consumers into paying more than $10 million in fees for falsely promised cash prizes, the Department of Justice has announced.

The unsealed indictment charges Mario Castro, 51, Jose Salud Castro, 70, Salvador Castro, 53, Miguel Castro, 55, Jose Luis Mendez, 45, and Andrea Burrow, 49, with mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud.  The indictment, secured by the Department’s Consumer Protection Branch and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Nevada, also charges Salvador Castro with making a false statement to investigators.  U.S. Postal Inspectors arrested five of the defendants last night. The sixth, Jose Salud Castro, turned himself into authorities this morning.

According to the indictment, the defendants’ prize-notification scheme led victims, many of whom were elderly and vulnerable, to believe that they could pay a small $20 or $30 fee to claim a large cash prize.  The indictment alleged that none of the victims who submitted fees ever received a large cash prize.

“The Department will pursue and prosecute those who defraud elderly or vulnerable consumers,” said Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division. “We have alleged that these defendants perpetrated a cruel hoax on their victims and relentlessly targeted many with repeated fraudulent mailings.”

The indictment asserts that the defendants operated the scheme from 2010 to February 2018, when postal inspectors executed multiple search warrants and the Department of Justice obtained a court order shutting down the fraudulent mail operation.  Mario Castro, Jose Salud Castro, Salvador Castro, Miguel Castro, and Jose Luis Mendez allegedly worked at the printing and mailing businesses that sent the fraudulent mail and shared the profits from the fraudulent prize notices.  The remaining defendant, Andrea Burrow, opened victim return mail, sorted cash and other payments, and entered data from the victims’ responses into a database that the scheme used to target past victims with more fraudulent mail, according to the indictment.

The defendants are alleged to have ignored multiple cease and desist orders from the United States Postal Service that prohibited their mailing companies from sending fraudulent mail.  The defendants responded by changing the names of their companies and using straw owners to hide their continuing fraud. 

Three of the defendants’ co-conspirators – Patti Kern, Edgar Del Rio, and Sean O’Connor – pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud earlier this year.

“It will be a priority of this office to dismantle organizations like this one that prey on the elderly and vulnerable,” said U.S. Attorney Nicholas Trutanich for the District of Nevada. “We will continue to investigate and prosecute these large-scale frauds that operate in Nevada and across the country.”

“Many people who received these solicitations in the mail thought they were winners, but they were not.  In fact, they were victims of scams exploiting the vulnerable.  For many years, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service has been at the forefront of protecting consumers from fraud.  The consequences of this type of financial fraud scheme are far reaching and damaging.  Anyone who engages in such conduct should know they will not go undetected and will be held accountable,” said Inspector in Charge Delany De Leon-Colon of U.S. Postal Inspection Service’s Criminal Investigations Group at National Headquarters. 

The mail fraud and conspiracy charges each carry a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.  The false statement charge carries a statutory maximum sentence of five years in prison.  Each charge also carries a statutory maximum fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or gross loss from the offense.

An indictment is an accusation by a federal grand jury and is not evidence of guilt.  The defendants should be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

The U.S. Postal Inspection Service investigated the case.  The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Timothy Finley and Daniel Zytnick of the Department of Justice’s Consumer Protection Branch and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicholas Dickinson of the District of Nevada. 

Since President Trump signed the bipartisan Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act (EAPPA) into law, the Department of Justice has participated in hundreds of enforcement actions in criminal and civil cases that targeted or disproportionately affected seniors.  In particular, this past March the Department announced the largest elder fraud enforcement action in American history, charging more than 260 defendants in a nationwide elder fraud sweep.  The Department has likewise conducted hundreds of trainings and outreach sessions across the country since the passage of the Act.  Additional information on the Department of Justice’s efforts to combat elder fraud is at: https://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch/elder-fraud.

# # #

LAS VEGAS, Nev. – A federal court in Las Vegas, Nevada, permanently enjoined six individuals and 14 corporate entities from activities related to an alleged mail fraud scheme, the Department of Justice announced today.

In a complaint filed in February 2018, the United States alleged that the defendants mailed thousands of fraudulent solicitations each week. The solicitations purported to inform recipients that they had won large cash or prize packages, but needed to pay a fee to claim the winnings. The solicitations were styled as individual notices and stressed to recipients that they must return the requested fee quickly. According to the complaint, some of the solicitations contained what appeared to be handwritten notes congratulating the recipients on their good fortune, while others reassured recipients that the letters were not a scam. Individuals who sent the requested fees did not receive the expected prizes. The complaint alleged that the Las Vegas-based scheme defrauded consumers out of more than $10 million.

“Consumers should be able to open their mail without encountering false promises of wealth,” said Assistant Attorney General Joseph H. Hunt for the Department of Justice’s Civil Division. “The Department has and will continue to relentlessly pursue schemes like this one.”

“Some of these defendants constantly changed their schemes in attempts to stay one step ahead of the law,” said Delany DeLeon-Colon, Inspector in Charge for the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. “These results make clear that we will peel back the layers, find the individuals behind these schemes, and hold them to account.”

The complaint alleged that defendant Patti Kern orchestrated the activities of the other individual defendants, all of whom live in the Las Vegas area. The complaint alleged that defendants Edgar Del Rio, Sean O’Connor, and Epifanio Castro printed the solicitations; defendant Andrea Burrow opened and processed victim responses; and defendant Stephen Fennell managed the scheme’s lists of recipients. The solicitations were mailed under a plethora of company names, including 11 of the entities named as corporate defendants in the complaint.  

The district court entered a default judgment against 11 defendants today and previously entered consent decrees against the nine other defendants named in the complaint. Those orders prohibit the defendants from mailing solicitations like those identified in the complaint, as well as from engaging in activities related to such mailings, including receiving, handling, or opening any victim mail responding to solicitations and using or benefiting from lists of victims who previously responded to solicitations. Additionally, the orders authorize the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to open mail that was detained by law enforcement and return payments to the scheme’s victims. 

The matter was handled by Trial Attorney Jacqueline Blaesi-Freed of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, in coordination with the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Nevada and the United States Postal Inspection Service. Additional information on the original enforcement actions and Department of Justice’s efforts to combat elder fraud is at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-coordinates-nationwide-elder-fraud-sweep-more-250-defendants. 

# # #

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1if8XXlZWYQVAhX3CtWQq2FzunT_kZyCw1YH8n9EmSs4
  Last Updated: 2024-03-18 05:00:28 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E