Score:   1
Docket Number:   SD-NY  1:18-cr-00640
Case Name:   USA v. Concepcion Aquino et al
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-WfY0_3TcztjWD5Wb8aYPBnXiuNSfzkL3kGwBgok6lY
  Last Updated: 2024-04-09 14:18:14 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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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 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
Magistrate Docket Number:   SD-NY  1:18-mj-06622
Case Name:   USA v. Concepcion Aquino et al
  Press Releases:
Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and Angel M. Melendez, the Special Agent in Charge of the New York Office of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”), announced charges today against 12 individuals involved in a nationwide fraud conspiracy from 2014 to the present: ISAAC CONCEPCION AQUINO, a/k/a “Kaka,” MARIO DIAZ, a/k/a “Memin,” TOMAS GUILLEN, a/k/a “Diddy,” RONNIE DE LEON, JOSE ARGELIS DIAZ, JOEL PENA, JHONATAN DIAZ, a/k/a “Nino,” EDDY MORROBEL, RUDDY SANCHEZ, MICHAEL ROQUE, RAYNIEL ROBLES, and JOANDRA TEJADA GONZALEZ.  In connection with the fraud, the defendants and their associates improperly accessed more than 3,300 customers’ cellphone accounts, fraudulently obtained more than 1,200 cellphones, and caused losses exceeding $1 million.  Six defendants were arrested in the Southern District of New York and will be presented today before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: MARIO DIAZ, a/k/a “Memin,” TOMAS GUILLEN, a/k/a “Diddy,” JOSE ARGELIS DIAZ, JHONATAN DIAZ, a/k/a “Nino,” EDDY MORROBEL, and RAYNIEL ROBLES.  In addition, RONNIE DE LEON was arrested this morning in Ohio and will be presented this afternoon, in the Southern District of Ohio, before Chief Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers.

The following defendants remain un-apprehended at this time: ISAAC CONCEPCION AQUINO, a/k/a “Kaka,” JOEL PENA, RUDDY SANCHEZ, MICHAEL ROQUE, and JOANDRA TEJADA GONZALEZ.

U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said:  “The defendants allegedly engaged in a sophisticated nationwide conspiracy to hack into the accounts of ordinary people and exploit those accounts for their own gain, obtaining valuable electronic devices at others’ expense.  The defendants allegedly perpetrated their scheme through various means, including buying victims’ account information over the dark web.  Thanks to the dedicated work of our partners at HSI, this alleged ring of cellphone fraudsters will now face the call of justice.”

HSI Special Agent in Charge Melendez said:  “Those arrested today were allegedly part of a fraud network operating in New York, the Dominican Republic and the Darknet.  Their activities left a trail of unsuspecting victims across the United States and cost businesses significant losses.  They traveled to 30 states to obtain cellphones that were later sold through fencing operations in the Bronx. Telecommunications fraud is a huge business and where there is a profit to be made by criminals, HSI’s longstanding El Dorado Task Force will follow the money to bring those perpetrators to justice.”

According to the allegations in the Complaint unsealed today[1]:

From at least 2014 to the present, a group of individuals (the “Fraud Ring”) perpetrated a wide-ranging scheme to obtain valuable, new electronic devices – primarily iPhones, but also iPads, tablets, and watches – at others’ expense.  During the course of the conspiracy, the Fraud Ring fraudulently obtained more than $1 million worth of devices.  To facilitate the scheme, the Fraud Ring traveled to at least 30 different states, but often brought or shipped the fraudulently obtained cellphones back to the Bronx, where they regularly sold them.

The Fraud Ring regularly engaged in intrusions into existing customers’ accounts with cellular service companies and obtained new phones or “upgrade” phones by paying only a small fee in the store, while charging the vast majority of the purchase price to existing customers’ accounts, without the consent or knowledge of these existing customers.  The scheme’s victims therefore included both customers, whose identities were stolen and/or whose accounts were accessed without authorization, and cellphone service providers, which typically bore financial losses for fraudulently obtained devices.

The Fraud Ring used various mechanisms to perpetrate their scheme, including buying cellphone customers’ personal identifying information (“PII”) over the dark web; phishing, in which the Fraud Ring sent a link to cellphone customers that, if pressed, allowed the Fraud Ring to hack into the customers’ accounts; using fraudulent identifications to persuade retail store employees that conspirators were someone else; and opening accounts using social security numbers that appeared to match conspirators’ names but in fact belonged to victims.

During the course of the investigation, HSI executed a search warrant on a suspected hub of the Fraud Ring in Mt. Vernon, New York (the “Residence”).  Law enforcement encountered six of the 12 charged defendants in the Residence and seized (among other things) approximately 47 electronic devices, including 12 computers.  Two IP addresses associated with the Residence were used to access at least approximately 3,300 cellphone company customer accounts, and to fraudulently purchase at least approximately 1,294 cellphones.  The seized computers contained various indicators of involvement in the fraud, including:

A 15-minute-long “How-to” video, which detailed the steps necessary to commit cellphone fraud, including how to use victim PII to fraudulently purchase devices;

Many indicators that the computers had accessed the darkweb, several websites where victim PII is sold (sometimes for as little as $3), and cryptocurrency exchanges, including for Bitcoin; and

Numerous Google searches in furtherance of the fraud (e.g., “best buy upgrade checker phone,” “att activate phone,” “verizon.com check order status,” “check my order status sprint,” “add authorized user last name,” “California driver license number format,” “Utah driver license photo,” and “most common last names for Spanish rich people”).

*                *                *

Each of the 12 defendants is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, and one count of aggravated identity theft, which carries a mandatory minimum penalty of two years in prison, which must run consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed.  The maximum and mandatory minimum potential sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendants will be determined by the judge.

This case is being handled by the Office’s General Crimes Unit.  Assistant United States Attorneys Michael D. Neff and Brett M. Kalikow are in charge of the prosecution.

The charges contained in the Complaint are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

 



[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the text of the Complaint and the description of the Complaint set forth herein constitute only allegations, and every fact described should be treated as an allegation.





Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bcBhXy4_ZNJMZqrct3p6PiX7CPsRD-Y88mINjDaCDmM
  Last Updated: 2024-04-09 14:15:57 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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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 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
Magistrate Docket Number:   SD-NY  1:18-mj-06763
Case Name:   USA v. Reyes
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yDtjGqDs7yYMH7AObXCpyijxPwn_x5Z0x1rtfbpSXKE
  Last Updated: 2024-04-09 14:16:12 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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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