r.lrq]( - foster global · criminal complaint ... affidavit, and other document required by the...

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:1A091 Rev. 11182

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOCKET NO. -v. r.lrQ](" ~ FILED r-----:::-'-v:::'. !.l'.1 GUUI-IT

MAGISTRATE'S CASE NO. LILIA TABAFUNDA, OCT ~_ ] aka "Lily Tabafunda," II!liI ..

~ It . "~~NTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA'

-"U IIY , -,

Complaint for violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1546(a): False· Statement in an Immigration Application

NAME OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE '. LOCATION UNITED STATES

HON. FERNANDO M. OLGUIN MAGISTRATE JUDGE Los Angeles, CA

DATE OF OFFENSE PLACE OF OFFENSE ADDRESS OF ACCUSED (IF KNOWN)

January 19,2010 Los Angeles County

COMPLAINANT'S STATEMENT OF FACTS CONSTITUTING THE OFFENSE OR VIOLATION:

On or about January 19,2010, defendant LILIATABAFUNDA, also known as "Lily Tabafunda," knowingly made under oath, and knowingly subscribed as true under the penalty of perjury, a false statement with respect to a material fact in an application, affidavit, and other document required by the immigration laws and regulations prescribed thereunder, and knowingly presented such application, affidavit, and other document that contained such false statement and that failed to contain any reasonable basis in law or fact, in that defendant knowingly presented a Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (Form 1-129) to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in which defendant falsely stated that Barlow Respiratory Hospital petitioned for C. De Castro to obtain an H1-B non-immigrant visa so that C. De Castro could work for Barlow Respiratory Hospital, whereas, in truth and in fact, as defendant then knew, Barlow Respiratory Hospital did not intend for C. De Castro to obtain an H1-B non-immigrant visa and did not intend for C. De Castro to be employed at that hospital, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a).

BASIS OF COMPLAINANT'S CHARGE AGAINST THE ACCUSED: (See attached affidavit which is incorporated as part of this Complaint)

MATERIAL WITNESSES IN RELATION TO THIS CHARGE:

Being duly sworn, I declare that the SIGNATURE OF COMPLAINANT foregoing is true and correct to the I best of my knowledge. Cynthia Penilla Is J ,

OFFICIAL TITLE

Special Agent - DOL

Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence,

SIGNATURE OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE(l) FEf{NANDO M. OLGUIN

DATE

October 16,2012 . . 1) See Federal Rules of Cnmmal Procedure rules 3 and 54 . ~v-t.--

SAUSA: JAMES M. LEFT REC:

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:2

A F F I D A V I T

I, Cynthia Penilla, being duly sworn, do hereby depose and

say the following:

1. I am a Special Agent ("SA") with the united States

Department of Labor ("DOL"), Office of Inspector General, Office

of Labor Racketeering and Fraud Investigations, in West Covina,

California, and I have been so employed since March 2007. Prior

to becoming an SA with the DOL, I was an investigator for the

DOL, Wage and Hour Division for seven years. I am a graduate of

the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia.

As a DOL SA, my duties include investigating fraud, waste, and

abuse of various DOL programs. During my tenure as an SA, I have

participated in and conducted investigations of criminal activity

including immigration fraud, unemployment insurance fraud,

identity theft, money laundering, and other related financial

crimes. During the investigation of these cases, I have

participated in the execution of search and arrest warrants and

have seized evidence of violations of federal law.

2. The information contained in this affidavit is the

result of my own personal investigation and information

communicated to me by other law enforcement officers familiar

with these facts. Unless specifically indicated, all

conversations, statements, and other information described in

this affidavit are described only in part and in substance. To

the extent any information in this affidavit is not within my


personal knowledge, I learned of it through other law enforcement

officers and/or their reports, my review of business records, and

my analysis of law enforcement databases and public records.

I.

PURPOSE OF THE AFFIDAVIT

3. ,This affidavit is made in support of a criminal

complaint against LILIA TABAFUNDA ("TABAFUNDA"), also known as

"Lily Tabafunda," charging her with violating Title 18, United

States Code, Sections 1546(a), False Statement in an Immigration

Application.

II.

OVERVIEW OF THE INVESTIGATION

4. As discussed in greater detail in the attached

affidavit in support of a search warrant1 (Exhibit A), since

2003, TABAFUNDA and Gilbert Lawrence ("Lawrence"), through shell

companies and by assuming the identities of mainly non-profit

companies, have engaged in a scheme to submit over 100 fraudulent

employment-based immigration petitions and supporting

documentation to the U.S. Department of Homelanq Security

("DHS"), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("CIS"), and

the DOL, Employment and Training Administration, Office of

Foreign Labor Certification, for the purpose of fraudulently

1 The execution of the search warrant and the seized documents and computers are also discussed below.

2


procuring work visas for alien beneficiaries. In so doing,

TABAFUNDA and Lawrence submitted, and caused to be submitted,

false and fraudulent information concerning the availability,

nature, and location of jobs, the existence of employers, and the

wages that would be paid for these purported jobs.

5. In carrying out this visa fraud scheme, TABAFUNDA and

Lawrence submitted petitions on behalf of alien beneficiaries for

positions at companies where the employer had no knowledge of

this activity. Other applications and petitions were signed in

the names of actual company employees without their knowledge.

6. TABAFUNDA used the office of the People's Resources

International Services ("PRIS"), presently located at 3699

Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-28 in Los Angeles, California, to

meet with aliens on whose behalf TABFUNDA and/or Lawrence

submitted fraudulent visa petitions. The address for the office

of PRIS has also been listed on fraudulent visa petitions as the

mailing address for the companies that are listed as filing the

visa petitions when in fact TABAFUNDA and/or Lawrence actually

filed the petitions.

7. As part of the investigation into this case, DOL and

ICE agents interviewed numerous employers and alien beneficiaries

for whom TABAFUNDA and Lawrence filed applications and petitions.

These aliens stated, among other things, that TABAFUNDA and

Lawrence charged the alien beneficiaries between $2,500 and

3


$8,000 to file each fraudulent employment-based petition. DOL

and ICE have identified over 100 employment-based visa petitions

that TABAFUNDA and Lawrence filed on behalf of alien

beneficiaries.

III.

BACKGROUND: EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA PROGRAMS

8. Based on my training and experience with the DOL and

with other investigations into immigration benefits fraud,

including employment-based visa fraud, I am aware that a U.S.

employer seeking to employ an alien may file either: (1) a non-

immigrant petition seeking a temporary employment visa for an

alien beneficiary; or (2) an immigrant petition seeking permanent

resident status for the alien beneficiary. The requesting

company is referred to as the "petitioner," and the alien is

referred to as the "beneficiary."

A. Non-immigrant Petitions Seeking Temporary Status

9. A petitioner seeking to employ a non-immigrant alien

temporarily (for a three-year period) in a professional or

specialty occupation is required to file a Labor Condition

Application ("LCA") in a hard copy version (Form ETA-9035) or in

an electronic version (Form ETA-9035E) with the DOL before CIS

may approve an H-1B non-immigrant visa ("work visa") petition for

temporary employment. In the LeAl the petitioner's

representative must submit under penalty of perjury information

4


about the prospective employment, such as the nature of the open

position, the rate of pay, the period of employment, and the

location for the business.

10. If DOL approves the LCA, the petitioner must then file

with CIS a copy of the approved LCA and a petition for non-

immigrant worker (Form I-129) along with supporting

documentation. In the Form I-129 petition, the petitioner must

submit under penalty of perjury information about the prospective

employment, including the job title, physical location of the

job, wages or salary, and the availability of the job. The

petitioner must also submit documents showing that the alien is

qualified for the specialty job position. If CIS approves the

Form I-129 petition, an H1-B visa is issued to the alien.

B. Work Visa Fraud Schemes

11. Based on my training and experience, I know that

employment-based visa fraud usually follows recognizable

patterns, specifically:

a. Fraudulent petitioners commonly invent petitioning

companies or employers from whole cloth, and an investigation

will reveal that the petitioning employer does not exist.

b. Alternatively, fraudulent petitions may list an

actual emp~oyer's name and location in an employment-based

petition, but the petitioner does not intend to actually employ

the beneficiary alien. On some occasions, the listed employer is

5


aware of the application. On other occasions, the petitioner

uses the employer's name without the employer's knowledge.

c. Fraudulent petitioners also commonly misrepresent

the nature of the job available, the wages available, location of

the job, and the qualifications of the beneficiary alien to

influence approval of employment-based petitions by U.S. labor

and immigration authorities.

d. False or misleading statements in a petition

regarding the existence of a fraudulent employer or a nonexistent

job are material to the determination by DOL and CIS as to

whether to approve an application or petition. Moreover, the

discovery of such false or,misleading statements in a previously

approved application or petition (or in supporting documentation)

may constitute grounds for revocation of that prior approval.

IV.

FACTS SUPPORTING THE COMPLAINT

12. As discussed in detail in the affidavit in support of

the search warrant, sworn on August 21, 2012, before the

Honorable Andrew J. Wistrich and incorporated herein by

reference, the investigation of DOL and ICE revealed that

TABAFUNDA and Lawrence filed over 100 fraudulent employment-based

visa petitions. (See Exhibit A, attached). A representative

sample of those fraudulent petitions showing the general manner

in which the visa scheme operated is set forth in the affidavit

6


in support of the search warrant. Three of the fraudulent visa

petitions listed Barlow Respiratory Hospital as the petitioning

company I which include a petition filed on behalf of C. De

Castro. (Exhibit AI Pages 28-30 1 paragraphs 48 to 52). The visa

petition filed on behalf of C. De Castro is discussed further

below.

13. On or about January 19 1 2010 1 CIS received ~ Form 1-129

petition for C. De Castro that Barlow Respiratory Hospital

purportedly filed as the petitioner. The Form 1-129 listed J.

Coatsworth as the person signing the petition on behalf of

Barlow. The mailing address on the Form 1-129 was 3699 Wilshire

Boulevard I Suite 700-30 1 in Los Angeles I a former address for

TABAFUNDA and the office of PRIS I as stated in the affidavit in

support of the search warrant. (Exhibit AI pages 36-371

paragraphs 67-69). The corresponding LeA was filed the same

date. The visa petition and the LCA stated that Barlow intended

to employ C. De Castro as a "Health Educator. 1I

14. On or about March 31 1 2011 1 ICE Special Agent ("SAil)

Maria Castro and I interviewed Coatsworth at Barlow. Chief

Executive Officer M.C. was also present. During this interview l

Coatsworth stated the following:

a. Coatsworth began working for Barlow in November

2009 as the Vice President of Human Resources. Coatsworth and

K.L'I the Employment Coordinator I managed the H-1B applications.

7


Coatsworth stated that Barlow used a law firm to complete the

immigration petitions. Coatsworth also stated that Barlow

petitioned for alien workers for medical positions onlYr not for

administrative positions. Coatsworth further stated that she had

only signed one petition r which concerned an extension of an H-1B

visa for an ICU Nurse.

b. Coatsworth was shown the CIS file containing the

visa petition and the LCA for C. De Castro. Coatsworth stated

that the position of "Health Educator/l did not exist at Barlow.

Coatsworth did not sign the Form 1-129 or the LCA. Coatsworth

also stated that the last name on the signature liner which

listed her name r was misspelled.

c. Coatsworth and M.C. did not recognize the name of

C. De Castro r and they stated that C. De Castrors name was not

found in Barlowrs employment records.

15. On or about October 11r 2012 r SA Castro and I

interviewed C. De Castro in Las Vegas r Nevada r where De Castro

resided. At that timer De Castro stated the following:

a. TABAFUNDA arranged for De Castro to obtain her

H1-B non-immigration visa through Barlow. De Castro paid

TABAFUNDA $8 r OOO for TABAFUNDArs services.

b. Before obtaining her visa r De Castro resided in

the Philippines and communicated with TABAFUNDA by telephone and

e-mail.

8


c. De Castro confirmed that she never worked for

Barlow Respiratory Hospital.

d. After De Castro arrived in the United States r

TABAFUNDA told De Castro that the position at Barlow was closed.

TABAFUNDA also told De Castro that TABAFUNDA could assist De

Castro in finding another employer for $4 r OOO.

e. De Castro was attempting to obtain another H1-B

visa through her actual employer in Las Vegas.

16. On or about August 22r 2012 r agents from DOL and ICE

executed a search warrant at the office of PRIS. At that timer

DOL and ICE agents seized five boxes of documents. These

documents included copies of passportsr other immigration

documents r resumes r and applications from clients r all of which

are consistent with TABAFUNDA entering into contracts with aliens

and applying for visa petitions on behalf of the aliens. The

seized documents also included spreadsheets showing the petitions

filed r the names of the aliens r and the amounts paid for

TABAFUNDArs services. The seized documents also included

correspondence from CIS r including acknowledgments of received

visa petitions.

17. During the execution of the search warrant r agents of

DOL and ICE also seized three personal computers. A search of

these computers is on going.

9


18. On or about August 22, 2012, SA Castro and I attempted

to interview TABAFUNDA at her residence in Los Angeles. At that

time, SA Castro and I informed TABAFUNDA of the search warrant

being executed at her place of business. SA Castro and I then

started to ask TABAFUNDA questions regarding some of the

fraudulent visa petitions. TABAFUNDA declined to answer any

questions and said that she first wanted to speak with an

attorney.

19. On or about October 15, 2012, U.S. Customs and Border

Protection informed SA Castro that TABAFUNDA was about to board a

cruise ship docked in Long Beach, California. The cruise ship

was scheduled for a five-day trip to ports-of-call in Catalina

Island and Mexico. Due to this notification of TABAFUNDA's

imminent departure from the United States, ICE decided. to arrest

TABAFUNDA.

10


v.

CONCLUSION

20. Based on the foregoing facts, there is probable cause

to believe that LILIA TABAFUNDA has violated Title 18, united

States Code, Section 1546(a), False Statement in an Immigration

Application.

I declare that the foregoing is true and correct to the best

of my knowledge and belief.

is ( Cynthia Penilla Special Agent U.S. Department of Labor

Subscribed and sworn before me

this L -----''--'-- day of October 2012.

FERNANDO M. OLGUIN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:13~ ~'"ff' AFFIDAVIT FOR SEARCH WARRANT· ~(f))\D ~(

;j;). . ~ -..,... .... . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOCKET NO. MAGISTRATE CASE NO .. v. 4" 1 00 ~M

THE PREMISES KNOWN AS: 8~.Jir! -.! '-' fIilII' •. '. NAME ADDRESS OF JUDGE OR U.S. MAGISTRATE

Office of People's Resources International Services JUDGE

3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-28 ANDREW J. WISTRICH Los Angeles, California United States Magistrate Judge Los Angeles, California

The'uildersigned being duly sworn deposes and says: That there is reason to believe that

o on the person of 181 on the premises known as . CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SEE ATTACHMENT A

The following property (or person) is concealed:

SEE ATTACHMENT B

Evidence of violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1546; Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001; Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341; Title 18, United States Code, Section 371; and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2(b)

Ii1l See attached affidavit which is incorporated as part of this affidavit for search warrant

Affiant states the following facts establishingthe foregoin~ounds for issuance of a Search Warrant

(SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT WHICH IS INCORPORATED AS PART OF THIS AFFIDAVIT FOR SEARCH WARRANT) SIGNATURE OF AFFIANT OFFICIAL TITLE, IF ANY

SPECIAL AGENT ',l:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR~OIG ~ OFFICE OF LABOR RACKETEERING AND FRAUD

CYNTHIA PENILLA INVESTIGATIONS

Sworn to befo~e me, and subscribed in my presence:

DATE JUDGE OR US MAGISTRATE JUDGE August 21,2012 1II\1J1D£.'W fi IW/".,. ... ,'"

I Umted States Judge or Judge of a State Court of Record . -- ..... , ", H!\liii1ivn

2 Ifa search is to be authorized "at any time in the day or night" pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 41(c),show reasonable cause therefor.

6~ SAUSA James Left:tja EXHIBIT fl

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:14).

ATTACHMENT A

1. The premises to be searched are described as follows:

a. The premises to be searched/ which is the office

of PRISt is located at 3699 Wilshire Boulevard/ Suite 700-28 in

Los Angeles/ California (the \\SUBJECT PREMISES//). The SUBJECT

PREMISES is a suite on the seventh floor of a high-rise brick

building located on the corner of Wilshire Bouleyard and South

Serrano Avenue. The building has a 24-Hour Fitness sign located

on the outside. The seventh floor of the building contains the

Wilshire Serrano Executive, Offices. These offices are located on

the east side of the building and are identified by the number

700/ which is located above the front door to the Executive

Offices.

b. The Wilshire Serrano Executive 'Offices are made up

of several rental suites and offices. Suite 700-28/ which is

also known as Suite 728/ is part of the Executive Offices. It is

a small/ individual office that is located in the north-east

section of the seventh floor. Suite 700-28 is an interior office

with no windows/ as identified in the floor plan that the

building manager provided to me and attached hereto as an

exhibit. See Exhibit 1. The number \\728" appears just outside

of the office next to the door.

i


ATTACHMENT B

1. Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully submit that

there is probable cause to believe that the fo~lowing items,

which constitute evidence, fruits, ~nd instrumentalities of

violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1546 (Fraud

and Misuse of Visas, Permits, and Other Documents) i Title 18,

United States Code, Section 1001 (False Statements) i' Title 18,

United States Code Section 1341 (Mail Fraud) i and Title 18,

United States Code, Section 371 (Conspiracy) will be found at the

SUBJECT PREMISES. For the purposes of t~is list, ""petitioner"

refers to a company submitting a visa pet"ition, "beneficiary"

refers to the alien beneficiary of that petition.

a. Documents related to immigrant and non-immigrant

employment-based visa petitions for the period from ~003 to the

date of execution of the search warrant.

b. Documents submitted br to be submitted to the DOL,

including, but not limited to Forms ETA-9035 and ETA-9035E (Labor

Condition Application or "LCA") and associated correspondence and

supporting documentation.

c. Documents submitted to, to be submitted to, or

received by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service

("INS"), CIS, or DHS, including, but not limited to Forms I-129

(Nonimmigrant Petition for Temporary Alien Worker), letters from

potential or current employers in support of such forms (drafts

and final), associated correspondence, approval notices, and

ii


'" t '


d. Documents or files related to the following

business names:

(a) people's Resources International Services (\\PRISff) j

(b) Ambassadors Emancipation Homes, Inc.

(c) Barlow Respiratory Hospitalj

(d) Boy Scouts of AmerlCaj

(e) City of Hopej

(f) Daughter of Powers, Inc.j

(g) Global Royal Servicesj

(h) Great Beginning for Black Babies, Inc.j

(i) National Veterans Foundationj

. (j) Pris-Ace Constructors, Inc.j

(k) Rise Outreach, Inc.;

(1) World Wide Crusade For Christj

(m) any reasonably similar permutation of the foregoing

business names (collectively the \\Employersff); and

(n) any company with a mailing or in care of address of

the 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suites 700, 700-10, 700-28, or 700-

30, in Los Angeles, California, or an.e-mail address of

[email protected]. from October 2003 to the present.

e. Documents and files related to the beneficiaries

of the petitions submitted by any of the Employers or any company

with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing address from October 2003 to

the present.

iii


f. Documents related to payments made by or received

by TABAFUNDA and/or LAWRENCE related to the Employers or any

company with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing address from October

2003 to the present.

g. Documents related to payments made by TABAFUNDA

and/or LAWRENCE or received by TABAFUNDA and/or LAWRENCE relating

to any beneficiaries of petitions or applications that name any

of the Employers or any company with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing

address from October 2003 to the present.

h. Documents relating to payments made by or received

by any of the Employers or any company with the SUBJECT PREMISES

mailing address from October 2003 to the present.

i. Documents and files related to the employment [

personnel [ human resources[ time records [ paycheck and payroll

records of the beneficiaries and petitioners from October 2003 to

the present.

j. Documents relating to the income of TABAFUNDA

and/or LAWRENCE and any of the Employers or any company with the

SUBJECT PREMISES mailing address [ including State of California

Employment Development Department documents that indicate the

payment of wages [ withholding [ and number of person employed for

PRISt contracts with other companies or organizations related to

the filing of visa petitions and LCAs[ and associated

c?rrespondence from October 2003 to the present.

iv


k. Bank Statements, checks, deposit tickets, check

registers, credit card receipts, invoices, money orders,

traveler's checks, and cashier's checks showing receipt or

distribution of profits related to petitions and applications

involving any 'of the Employers or any company with the SUBJECT

PREMISES mailing address from October 2003 to the present.

1. Correspondence, notes, telephone notes, internal

memoranda, ~ppointment books and calendars, and address books

related to petitions and applications involving any of the

Employers or any company with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing


m. Financial and operation statements, trial

balances, adjusting entries, balance sheets, income statements,

and sales reports showing receipt or distribution of profits




n. Devices or documents that may be connected with

the preparation of the employment-based petitions and related

documents, including: official (or official-looking), seals,

stamps, insignia, letters, letterhead, forms, and writing

pertaining to employment-based petitions.

o. Keys, utility bills, leases, rental agreements,

and personal papers or possessions showing domihion and control

over 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suites 700, 700-10, 700-28, or 700-

v


30, in Lbs Angeles, California.

p. Safe deposi~ box keys and rental records, storage

facility keys, and all records pertaining to the location,

rental, access, and entry of any-storage facility.

q., As used above, the terms records, documents,

programs, applications, or materials includes records, documents,

programs, applications, or materials created, modified, or stored

in any form.

2. with respect to any digital devices falling within the

scope of the foregoing search categories, or any digital devices

containing evidence falling within the scope of the foregoing

search categories, records, documents, programs, applications or

materials, or evidence of the absence of same, sufficient to show

the actual user(s) of the digital device during the, time period

2003 to the date of execution of this wa'rrant.

3. As used above, the terms records, documents, programs,

applications or materials include records, documents, programs,

applications or materials created, modified or stored in any

form, including in digital form on ~ny digital device and any

forensic copies thereof. As used both above and below, the term

"digital device" includes any electronic system or device capable

of storing and/or processing data in digital form, including:

central processing units; laptop or notebook computers; personal

digital assistants; wireless communication devices such as

telephone paging devices, beepers, and mobile telephones;

vi


peripheral input/output devices such as keyboards, printers,

scanners, plotters, monitors, and drives intended for removable I'

I media; related communications devices such as modems, cables, and

connections; storage media such as hard disk drives,_ floppy

disks, compact disks, magnetic tapes used to store digital data

(excluding analog tapes such as VHS), and memory chips; and

security devices.

4. - In searching for digital devices and in searching

digital data stored on digital devices, law enforcement personnel

executing this search warrant will employ the following

procedure:

a. Law enforcement personnel or other individuals

assisting law enforcement personnel will, in their discretion,

either search the digital device(s) on-site or seize and

transport the device(s) to an appropriate law enforcement

laboratory or similar facility to be searched at that location.

The team of law enforcement personnel, which may include the

investigating agent(s), and/or individuals assisting law

enforcement personnel searching the digital device(s) shall

complete the search as soon as is practicable but not to exceed

60 days from the date of execution of this warrant. If

additional time is needed, tpe government may seek an extension

of this time period from the Court within the original 60 day

period from the date of execution of the warrant.

vii


b. The team searching the digital devices will do so

only by using search protocols specifically chosen to identify

only the specific items to be seized under this warrant.

c. The team may subject all of the data contained in

the digital device capable of containing items to be seized, as

specified in this warrant, . to the protocols to determine whether

the digital device and any data falls witnin the items to be

seized as set forth herein. The team searching the digital

device may also search for and attempt to recover "deleted,"

\\hidden" or encrypted data to determine, pursuant to the

protocols, whether the data falls within the list of items to be

seized as set forth herein.

d. The team searching the digital device also may use

tools to exclude normal operating system files and standard

third-party software that do not need to be searched.

e. When searching a digital device pursuant to the

specific protocols selected, the team searching the digital

device shall make and retain notes regarding how the search was

conducted pursuant to the selected protocols.

f. If the team searching a digital device pursuant to

the selected protocols encounters immediately apparent contraband

or other evidence of a crime outside.the scope of the items to be

seized, the team shall immediately discontinue its search of that

digital device pending further order of the Court and shall make

and retain notes detailing how the contraband or other evidence

viii


of a crime was encountered, including how it was immediately

apparent contraband or evidence of a crime.

g.- At the conclusion of the search of the digital

devices as set forth in subparagraph (a) above, any digital

device determined to be itself an instrumentality of the offenses

and all the data thereon shall be retained ,by the government

until further order of court or one year after the conclusion of

the criminal case/investigation.

h. Notwithstanding the above, after the completion of

the search of the digital devices as set forth in subparagraph

(a) above, the government shall not access digital data fal,ling

outside the scope of the items to be seized in this warrant on

any retained digital devices or digital data absent further order

of court.

i. If the search team determines that a digital

device is not an instrumentality of any offense under

investigation and does not contain any data falling within the

list of items to be seized pursuant to this warrant, the

government will as soon as practicable return the digital device

and delete or destroy all the forensic copies thereof.

j. If the search determines that the digital device

or the forensic copy is not an instrumentality of the offense but

does contain data falling,within the list of the items to be

seized pursuant to this warrant, the government either (I) within

the time period authorized by the Court for completing the

ix


search, return to the Court for an order authorizing retention of

the digital device and forensic copy; or (ii) retain only a copy

of the data found to fall within the list of the items to be

seized pursuant to this warrant and return the digital device and

delete or destroy all the forensic copies thereof.

5. In order to search for data that is capable of being

read or interpreted by a digital device, law enforcement

personnel are authorized to seize the following items, subject to

the procedures set forth above:

a. Any digital device capable of being used to

commit, further, or store evidence of the offense listed-above;

b. Any equipment used to facilitate the transmission,

creation, display, encoding or storage of digital data, including

word processing equipment, modems, docking stations, monitors,

printers, plotters, encryption devices, and optical scanners;

c. Any magnetic, electronic or optical storage device

capable of storing data, such as floppy disks, hard disks, tapes,

CD-ROMs, CD-R, CD-RWs, DVDs, optical disks, printer or memory

buffers, smart cards, PC cards, memory calculators, electronic

dialers, electronic notebooks, cellular telephones, and personal

digital assistants;

d. Any documentation, operating logs and reference

manuals regarding the operation of the digital device or software

used in the digital device;

x


e. Any applications, utility programs, compilers,

interpreters, and other software used to facilitate direct or

indirect communication with the digital, device;

f. Any physical keys, encryption devices, dongles,

and similar physical 'items that are necessary to gain access to

the digital device or data stored on the digital device; and

6. The special procedures relating to digital media found

in this warrant govern only the search of digital media pursuant

to the authority conferred by this warrant and do not apply to

any search of digital media pursuant to any other court order.

xi


A F F I D A V I T

I, Cynthia Penilla, being duly sworn, do hereby depose and

say the following:

1. I am a Special Agent ("SA") with the united States

Department of Labor ("DOL"), Office of Irispector General, ~ffice

of Labor Racketeering and Fraud Investigations, in West Covina,

California, and I have been so employed since March 2007. Prior

to becoming an SA with the pOL, I was an investigator for· the

DOL, Wage and Hour Division for seven years. I am a graduate of

the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia.

As a DOL SA, my duties include investigating fraud, waste, and

abuse of various DOL programs. During my tenure as an SA, I have

participated in and conducted investigations of criminal activity

including immigration fraud, unemployment insurance' fraud,

identity theft, money laundering, and other related financial

crimes. During the investigation of these cases, I hav$

participated in the execution of search and arrest warrants and

have seized evidence of violations of federal law.

2. The information contained in this affidavit is the

result of my own personal investigation and information

communicated to me by other law enforcement officers familiar

with these facts. Unless specifically indicated, all

conversations, statements, and other information described in

this affidavit are described only in part and in substance. To

the extent any information in this affidavit is not within my


personal knowledge, I learned of it through other law enforcement

officers and/or their reports, my review of business records, and

my analysis of law enforcement databases and public records.

3. Among other things, I have learned the facts set forth

in this affidavit through my own review of the documents

discussed herein, interviews of alien beneficiaries, undercover

operations, and through my discussions with other law enforcement

agents and federal and California State officials. My

conclusions are based on my training and experience in

investigating immigration and employment-based benefits fraud.

I.

PURPOSE OF THE AFFIDAVIT

4. This affidavit is made in support of an application

for a search warrant for the office of People's Resources

International Services ("PRIS"), located at 3699 Wilshire

Boulevard, Suite 700-28, in Los Angeles, California (the "SUBJECT

PREMISES") for evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of

violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 154.6 (Fraud

and Misuse of Visas, Permits, and Other Documents) i Title 18,

United States Code, Section 1001 (False Statements); Title 18,

United States Code Section 1341 (Mail Fraud) i Title 18, United

States Code, Section 371 (Conspiracy); and Title 18, united

states Code, Section 2(b) (Causing Acts to be Done).

2


5. This affidavit is submitted for the limited purpose of

establishing probable cause for the requested search warrant and

does not purport to include each and every fact known to me

concerning this investigation. The dates of the incidents

described herein occurred or happened on or about the dates

stated in the affidavit.

II.

OVERVIEW OF THE INVESTIGATION

6. As discussed in greater detail below, since 2003, LILIA

TABAFUNDA ("TABAFUNDA") and GILBERT LAWRENCE ("LAWRENCE"),

through shell companies and by assuming the identities of mainly

non-profit companies, have engaged in a scheme to submit over 100

fraudulent employment-based immigration petitions and supporting

documentation to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security

("DHS"), u.s. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("CIS"), and

the DOL, Employment and Training Administration, Office of

Foreign Labor Certification, for the purpose of fraudulently

procuring work visas for alien beneficiaries. In so doing,

TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE submitted, and caused to be submitted,

false and fraudulent information concerning the availability,

nature, and location of jobs, the existence of employers, and the

wages that would be paid for these purported jobs.

7. In carrying out this visa fraud scheme, TABAFUNDA and

LAWRENCE submitted petitions on behalf of alien beneficiaries for

3


positions at companies where the employer had no knowledge of

this activity. LAWRENCE signed 'many of the applications and

petitions as an officer or employee of these companies. other

applications and petitions were signed in the names of actual

company employees without their knowledge.

8. The SUBJECT PREMISES I which is the office of the ,

People/s Resources International Services ("PRISII) I is used by

TABAFUNDA to meet with aliens on whose behalf TABAFUNDA and/or

LAWRENCE have submitted fraudulent visa petitions. The SUBJECT

PREMISES has also been listed on fraudulent visa petitions as the

address for shell companies that TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE have used

as part of their fraudulent scheme.

9. As part of the investigation into this case l DOL and

ICE agents interviewed numerous employers and alien beneficiaries

for whom TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE filed applications and petitions.

These aliens stated l among other things I that TABAFDNDA and

LAWRENCE charged the alien beneficiaries between $2 / 500 and

$8 / 000 to file each fraudulent employment-based petition.

10. As stated above I the DOL and ICE have identified over

100 employment-based visa petitions that TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE

filed on behalf of alien beneficiaries. This affidavit does not

discuss every filed petition. This affidavit instead provides a

representative sample of the visa petitionsfiled l which reflect

the manner of, operation of TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE/s fraudulent

4


scheme. Except where stated otherwise ( CIS approved all the visa

petitions( and DOL approved all the Labor Condition Applications

discussed below.

III.

PREMISES TO BE SEARCHED

11. The premises to be searched( which is the office of

PRISt is located at 3699 Wilshire Boulevard ( Suite 700-28 in Los

Angeles ( California (the uSUBJECT PREMISES"). The SUBJECT

PREMISES is a suite on the seventh floor of a high-rise brick

building located on the corner of Wilshire Boulevard and South

Serrano Avenue. The building has a 24-Hour Fitness sign located

on the outside. The seventh floor of the building contains the

Wilshire Serrano Executive Offices. These offices are located on

the east side of the building and are identified by the number

700( which is located above the front door to the Executive

Offices.

12. The Wilshire Serrano Executive Offices are made up of

several rental suites and offices. Suite 700-28( which is also

known as Suite 728( is part of the Executive Offices. It is a

small ( individual office that is located in the north-east

section of the seventh floor. Suite 700-28 is an interior office

with no windows ( as identified in the floor plan that the

building manager provided to me and attached hereto as an

exhibit. See Exhibit 1. The number U728" appears just outside

5

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:30" '" f;

of the office next to the door.

IV.

BACKGROUND: EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA PROGRAMS

~3. Based on my training and experience with the DOL and

with other investigations into immigration benefits fraud,

including employment-based visa fraud, I am aware that a U.S.

employer seeking to employ an alien may file either: (1) a

nonimmigrant petition seeking a temporary employment visa for an

alien beneficiary; or (2) an immigrant petition seeking permanent

resident status for the alien berteficiary. The requesting

company is referred to as the "petitioner," and: the alien is

referred to as the "beneficiary."

~4. Until the recent advent of electronic filing,

applications, petitions, and supporting documentation were almost

invariably sent to the DOL, the former INS, and CIS through the

U.S. mails or other commercial common carrier, such as Federal

Express, Airborne Express, and DHL. Having reviewed the

petitions filed by TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE, it appears that many

of the petitions and supporting documentation were filed through

the use of the mail. More recent applications were submitted via

electronic transmission to the DOL.

A. Non-immigrant Petitions Seeking Temporary Status

15. A petitioner seeking to employ a non-immigrant alien

temporarily (for a three-year period) in a professional or

6


specialty occupation is required to file a Labor Condition

Application ("LCA") in a hard copy version (Form ETA-9035) or in

an electronic version (Form ETA-9035E) with the DOL before CIS

may approve an H-1B non-immigrant visa ("work visa") petition for

tempqraryemployment. In the LCA, the petitioner's

representative must submit under penalty of perjury information

about the prospective employment, such as the nature of the open

position, the rate of pay, the period of employment, and the

location for the business.

16. If DOL approves the LCA, the petitioner must then file

with CIS a copy of the approved LCA and a petition for non-

immigrant worker (Form I-129) along with supporting

documentation. In the Form I-129 petition, the petitioner must

submit under penalty of perjury information about the prospective

emploYment, including the job title, physical location of the

job, wages or salary, and the availability of the job. The

petitioner must also submit documents showing that the alien is

qualified for the spe~ialty job position. If'CIS approves the

Form I-129 petition, an H1-B visa is issued to the alien.

17. Documents submitted by a petitioner in support of an

LCA and a Form I-129 petition, may include, but are not limited

to: (a) advertisements of the employment· vacancy, such as copies

of newspaper classified ads, internet pages, or job fair

handouts; (b) letters of recommendation and job descriptions from

7


prior employers of the proposed alien beneficiary; (c)

transcripts or other documentation of educational and/or training

courses taken by the proposed alien beneficiary; (d)

documentation of efforts to fill the employment vacancy with a

United States citizen or otherwise eligible worker; (e) foreign

documents and their translations; (f) wage and employer records

for the petitioner; (g) documents pertaining to petitioner's

intent to employ the petitioned alien beneficiary; and (h)· pay

stubs for the petitioned alien beneficiary.

B. Work Visa Fraud Schemes

18. Based on my training and experience, I know that

employment-based visa fraud usually follows recognizable

patterns, specifically:

a. Fraudulent petitioners commonly invent petitioning

companies or employers from whole cloth, and an investigation

will reveal that the petitioning employer does not exist.

b. Alternatively, fraudulent petitions may list an

actual employer's name and location in an employment-based

petition, but the petitioner does not intend to actually employ

the beneficiary alien. On some occasions, the listed employer is

aware of the application. On other occasions, the petitioner

uses the employer's name without the employer's knowledge.

c. Fraudulent petitioners also commonly misrepresent

the nature of the job available, the wages available, location of

8


the job, and the qualifications of the beneficiary alien to

influence approval of employment-based petitions by u.s. labor

and immigration authorities.

d. False or misleading statements in a petition

regarding the existence of a fraudulent employer or a nonexistent

job are material to the determination by DOL and CIS as to

whether to approve an application or petition. Moreover, the

discovery of such false or misleading statements in a previously

approved application or petition (or in supporting documentation)

may constitute grounds for revocation of that prior approval.

v.

FACTS SUPPORTING PROBABLE CAUSE

A. Review of Petitions Filed by TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE

19. On or about June 22, 2007, ICE received information

from the Fraud Detection and National Security Unit of CIS that

LAWRENCE was filing fraudulent Form 1-129 petitions. ICE and DOL

then commenced an investigation into the suspected fraudulent

activities of TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE in filing employment-based

visa petitions. As discussed in greater detail below, the

investigation included, among other things: (a) review and

analysis of the petitions filed by TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE, and

petitions filed in the names of the Employers (as defined below) i

(b) investigation into the nature of the Employers and their

purported businesses, including review of government records,

9


employment filings, and site visits; (d) interviews with persons

for whom TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE filed fraudulent employment-based

visa petitionsi and (e) an undercover operation in which'

TABAFDNDA described her willingness to participate in fraud. The

investigation uncovered over 100 fraudulent employment-based visa

petitions. A representative sample of those fraudulent petitions

showing the general manner in which the visa scheme operated is

set forth below.

20. During the investigation, DOL and ICE agents reviewed

the contents of CIS files associated with the petitions filed by

TABAFDNDA and LAWRENCE. Based on my training and experience, I

know that a CIS file generally contains all documents related to

the filing of a particular visa petition or other immigration

benefit. Both the CIS file and the corresponding petition or

application are assigned an alphanumeric code that contains

unique identifying information. Multiple petitions may be

consolidated into a single Alien File or "A-File," which provides

a permanent record of the alien's immigration history. The visa

petitions discussed below are contained in various DHS A-Files.

• National Veterans Foundation

21. On or about December 1, 2003, CIS received a Form I-129

petition for a non-immigrant worker for M.S.P. that the National

Veterans Foundation ("NVF") purportedly filed as the petitioner.

The petition listed a job description for an auditor. The

10


petition was later abandoned, in that the petition was not

pursued following a request for information. A corresponding LCA

(Labor Condition Application) was filed with DOL on or about

November 10, 2003. LAWRENCE signed both documents under the

penalty of perjury with his signature, "Gilbert Lawrence," and

listed his name as the Human Resources Director.

22. On or about March 12, 2008, DOL SA Aron Klaff and I

interviewed M.S.P. at her residence in San Pedro, California.

M.S.P. provided the following:

a. M.S.P. entered the united States in May 2003 on a

tourist visa. M.S.P. saw an advertisement in a Filipino

newspaper, stating that PRIS offered a review class for teachers.

M.S.P. went to PRIS, and TABAFUNDA hired M.S.P. as a clerk/

messenger for approximately one month.

b. Since M.S.P. did not have legal status in the

United States, TABAFUNDA offered to assist M.S.P. in filing an

H-1B work visa for her. TABAFUNDA said that "Gilbert" would file

the petition and that the employer for the H-1B visa would be

NVF. TABAFUNDA charged M.S.P. approximately $5,000 for the visa.

c. M.S.P. never worked for NVF.

23. On or about March 5, 2008, ICE SA Cousino and I

interviewedF.S.M. at the NVF office in Los Angeles. F.S.M.

provided the following:

11


a. F.S.M. is the CEO, president, and founder of NVF,

a non-profit organization staffed by United States veterans. NVF

provides education and crisis counseling for the veterans via

telephone.

b. Around the spring of May 2004, F.S.M. hired

LAWRENCE to answer the phones. Soon thereafter after, F.S.M.

starte.d having problems with LAWRENCE and began monitoring him.

c. While opening some incoming mail, F.S.M. found out

that LAWRENCE was using the company's name and address for other

businesses. F.S.M. also found immigration papers and other

letters containing the name and address of NVF.

d. Through the use of a private investigator, F.S.M.

determined that LAWRENCE had an office on Wilshire Boulevard in

Los Angeles. The private investigator also told F.S.M. that

LAWRENCE was receiving $5,000 to obtain "green cards" for aliens.

e. In January 2005, F.S.M. terminated LAWRENCE and

never saw him again.

f f. F.S.M. never gave LAWRENCE permission to use NVF's

name to petition anyone into the United States. LAWRENCE was

never the human resources director of the foundation. No foreign

workers ever worked there.

• World Wide Crusade for Christ

24. On or about October 28, 2003, CIS received a Form I-129

petition for S.C.E. that World Wide Crusade for Christ ("WWCC")

12


purportedly filed as the petitioner. A corresponding LCA was

filed on or about October 23, 2003. Both the Form 1-129 and the

LCA stated that WWCC petitioned to employ S.C.E. as an

accountant. LAWRENCE signed both documents under the penalty of

perjury with his signature, "Gilbert Lawrence," and listed his

name as the Chief Executive Officer of WWCC.

25. On or about June 13, 2008, ICE SA Frank Mendiola and I

interviewed S.C.E., who provided the following:

a.' S.C.E. entered the Dnited States on a visitor

visa. S.C.E. found an advertisement in a Filipino newspaper

concerning employer sponsorship.' The name of the company was

PRIS, and the address was 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700.

b. S.C.E. went to the PRIS office and met with

TABAFUNDA. TABAFUNDA said she ran, the company with LAWRENCE.

TABAFUNDA paid LAWRENCE $1000 to sign each petition.

c. TABAFUNDA charged S.C.E. $3,500 for a work visa.

TABAFUNDA told S.C.E. that the sponsoring company was WWCC.

S.C.E. instead worked for PRIS and never worked for WWCC.

26. On or about November 12, 2003, CIS received a letter

from W.J., who stated that he was the CEO of WWCC. W.J. also

stated that LAWRENCE was conducting business in the name of WWCC

without W.J.'s permission.

13


27. On or about December 121 2007, ICE SA Cousino and I

interviewed W.J. at his place of business in Los Angeles. W.J.

provided the following:

a. W.J. verified that he was the founder and owner of

WWCC, a non-profit organization providing housing for people with

drug addictions or mental illnesses.

b. Sometime in 2002 or 2003, W.J. met an unidentified

individual ("UI II) at a seminar in Los Angeles. Although W.J.

could not remember UL's name, he described UI as an Af~ican

American male in his early 50s, about 5'10 1f and 165 lbs. (This

matches the description of LAWRENCE.) UI offered to assist W.J.

in creating a new non-profit venture. UI prepared the paperwork.

W.J./S wife later noticed Ulls name in the paperwork and took the

documents to their CPA to remove Ulls name. Several months

later l W.J. started receiving mailings that identified his

company and UI as a sponsor for workers from another country.

c. W.J. tried to file a complaint with the local

police, but he was referred to an agency on First Street in Los

Angeles. Around the same time, W.J. ran into UI and confronted

him. UI denied any wrong doing l and soon after the mailings

stopped.

• Global Royal Services

28. On or about April 12, 2004, CIS received a Form 1-129

petition for J.L.W. that Global Royal Services, Inc. ("GRSII)

14


filed as the petitioner. The petition was later abandoned. A

corresponding LCA was filed on or about April 6, 2004. Both the

Form I-129 and the'LCA stated that GRS petitioned to employ

J.L.W. as an accountant. LAWRENCE signed both documents under

the penalty of perjury as president of GRS.

29. On or about June II, 2008, ICE SA Frank Mendiola, ICE'

SA Robert Boone, and I interviewed J.L.W. near her residence in

Aihambra, California. J.L.W. provided the following:

a. J.L.W. entered the United States in September 2003

on a tourist visa. J.L.W. stated that she read an advertisement

in the "Asian Journal" for PRIS located at 3699 Wilshire

Boulevard, Suite 700. The advertisement claimed PRIS helped

immigrants gain lawful status in the United States.

b. J.L.W. went to the PRIS office and met with

"Lily," who told J.L.W~ that she would find a sponsor for her

work visa. "Lily" stated that LAWRENCE would sponsor J.L.W,'s

visa. J.L.W. paid PRIS almost $4,000.

30. I have reviewed records on file with the State of

California Secretary of State relating to GRS. The Articles of

Incorporation list GRS as a Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation.

No officers were listed for the corporation, but the registering

agent listed was LAWRENCE with a mailing address of 3699 Wilshire

Boulevard, Suite 700-10.

15


31. I have reviewed Quarterly Wage and Withholding reports

("DE-6") concerning GRS on file with the California Employment

Development Department ("EDDfI). According to the EDD, GRS filed

no DE-6 forms for the period of January 2004.to February 2008,

which indicated that GRS was a shell corporation.

32. On or about january 15, 2008, ICE SA Cousino and I )

interviewed J.F. at US VETS of Los Angeles, which was located at

the alleged employer address for GRS. J.F. provided the

following:

a. J.F. was the property manager for US VETS - Los

Angeles, which was a non-profit organization within the U.S.

Department of Veterans A~fairs that provided transitional housing

for homeless or formerly homeless veterans.

b. J.F. stated that according to their records,

LAWRENCE lived in the building from July 7, 2003, to August 10,

2004.

c. J.F. has been with US VETS since 1993 and had

never heard· of "Global Royal Services." J.F. also stated that

. tenants were not allowed to run businesses from their apartments,

and all mail needed to be in the tenants' names or it was

returned.

d. J.F. also stated that US VETS has n€ver petitioned

for foreign workers, nor hired anyone from a foreign county.

16


• Rise Outreach, Inc.

33. On or about August 28 1 2007 1 'CIS received a Form 1-129

petition for A.B.G. that Rise Outreach l Inc. purportedly filed as

the petitioner. The petition stated thatA.B.G. would be

employed as a grants administrator. "Dr. Eric Page ll signed the

petition as president of the company. The DOL received a

corresponding LCA.

34. The Form 1-129 listed the mailing address for Rise

Outreach as the SUBJECT PREMISES. The petition also stated that

the beneficiary1s work would be performed at 3699 Wilshire

Boulevard l Suite 700-10 1 a suite located on the same floor as the

SUBJECT PREMISES. The LCA and correspondence addressed to CIS

also provided another address for Rise Outreach l 4603 Ashworth

Streetl in r.;akewood l California.

35. On or about July 28 1 2010 1 ICE SA Castro and ICE SA

Jason Lau interviewed A.B.G. at his residence in Alhambra l

California. At that time, A.B.G. provided the following:

a. A.B.G. entered the United States in 2007 on a

visitor visa. A.B.G. obtained an H-1B visa later that same year.

Rise Outreach petitioned for him as a Grants Administrator. The

office was located at the SUBJECT PREMISES, and "Gilbert" was his

supervisor.

b. Prior to obtaining his H1B visa, A.B.G. went to an .

employment agency called "People's Resources ll anG. spoke with

17


TABAFUNDA. The agency was located at 3699 Wilshire Boulevard,

Suite 700 in Los Angeles. During their first meeting, TABAFUNDA

asked A .. B.G. about his immigration status. TABAFUNDA also told

A.B.G. that she could obtain an H-IB visa for A.B.G., but A.B.G.

had to find an employer.

c. After A.B.G. could not find a potential employer,

he returned to TABAFUNDA. TABAFUNDA referred A.B.G. to Rise

Outreach, which was located on the same floor as PRIS. TABAFUNDA

told him to speak to "Gilbert," who later interviewed A.B.G. and

hired him.

d. A.B.G. paid TABAFUNDA about $5000 to "fix his

paperwork," which included obtaining a visa for his wife.

e. A.B.G. began working for Rise Outreach in mid-

2007. "Gilbert" was not specific about A.B.G.'S position as

grants administrator. A.B.G. expected to be working full-time

conducting research, but instead his duties were clerical in

nature. A.B.G. mainly reviewed grants for accuracy. Sometimes,

A.B.G. went to the office, and there would be nothing for him to

do. A.B.G. worked only about 15 to 20 hours per week, but

according to his visa, he was supposed to work fUll-time.

f. A.B.G. was paid in cash at about $11 per hour.

(However, the LeA stated that A.B.G. would be paid $15.50 per

hour.) There was no regular schedule of payment, and A.B.G. was

paid when there was work to perform.

18


g. A.B.G. stated that he usually worked by himself.

A.B.G. saw few employees, and most of the time "Gilbert" was' not

there. A.B.G. stated that he worked for "Gilbert" for almost one

year but later stated that he worked for only a couple of months.

A.B.G. never received a Form W-2 from Rise Outreach.

h. A.B.G. was asked about the address in Lakewood for

Rise Outreach. A.B.G. stated that he has never worked there and

that there were no other offices for Rise Outreach. A.B.G. did

not know "Dr. Eric Page."

i. Around December 2009, A.B.G. returned to TABAFUNDA

to prepare a visa application for another company. The new Form

I~129 was filed on or about June 24, 2010, on behalf of Utomo

Group, Inc. The petition stated that A.B.G. would be employed in

public relations/marketing. A.B.G. paid almost $3000 for the

petition and still owed $750~

j. A.B.G. also stated that TABAFUNDA filed a visa

petition for his wife to work for TABAFUNDA in a human resources

position at PRIS. (The petition was denied in January 2010, but

TABAFUNDA filed an appeal in March 2010.) A.M.G. paid $4000 for

the I-129 petition and $800 for the appeal.

k. A.B.G. inquired as, to the status of his petition

via the CIS website, which indicated insufficient funds were

issued. A.B.G. had made contact with TABAFUNDA to inquire about

19


this matter.

36. As previously stated, the LCA concerning Rise Outreach

listed an employer address of 4603 Ashworth Street, in Lakewood,

California. On or about May 5, 2010, SA Castro and I drove to

this address and saw that it was a residential home.

• Great Beginnings for Black Babies

37. On or about November 20, 2007, CIS received a Form I-

129 petition for J.C.F. that Great Beginnings for Black Babies,

Inc. ("GBBB") purportedly filed as the petitioner. A

corresponding LCA was filed on or about October 3, 2007. The

Form I-129 and LCA indicated J.C.F. would be employed as a budget

analyst. Both documents indicated that Z.J. signed the documents

as the Executive Director for the organization. The employer

address provided on the LCA and Form I-129 was an address in

Inglewood, California.. The mailing address provided was 3699

Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-10.

38. On or about August 24, 2010, ICE SA Castro and DOL SA

Klaff interviewed J.C.F. at his work address in Santa Fe Springs,

California. J.e.F. provided the following:

a. J.C.F. came into the United States in May 2003 on

a tourist visa. He later accompanied an acquaintance to the

offices of PRIS.· J.C.F. met TABAFUNDA, who explained how to file

an H1-B visa and the cost for the visa. TABAFUNDA claimed to own

PRIS with her business partner, LAWRENCE.

20


b. J.C.F. left the country and returned on July 2007

on a tourist visa. J.C.F. then contacted TABAFUNDA to help him

file an Hl-B petition. J.C.F. paid TABAFUNDA $8,000, and

TABAFUNDA told J.C.F. that the petitioning company was GBBB, but

"J. C. F. never worked there.

c. Subsequently, TABAFUNDA convinced J.C.F.to have

his current employer, V-Factory, petition for J.C.F. TABAFUNDA

stated that the petition would cost $3,070, which J.C.F.'s boss

paid with the agreement that J.e.F. would pay him back. However,

J.C.F. never performed the duties required for his H1-B visa.

39. On or about May 4, 2010, SA Castro and I interviewed

Z.J., who provided the following:

a. Z.J.founded GBBB in 1990, and Z.J .. retired in

December 2008. While she was working/ Z.J. was involved in the,

hiring of employees.'

b. Z.J. was shown the application and petition in the

name of J~C.F. Z.J. stated that she never petitioned for J.C.F.

and neither prepared nor signed the Form I-129 and LCA.

q. Z.J. was unfamiliar with the job announcement for

a budget analyst. Z.J. stated that GBBB did not have a budget

analyst. Z.J. was not familiar with the address listed on the

job announcement/ the mailing address of the SUBJECT PREMISES, or

the e-mail [email protected]. which was provided on

the Form I-129 and the LCA.

21


d. Z.J. hired mostly permanent residents or u.s.

citizens familiar with the local community.

e. Z.J. did not know LAWRENCE or TABAFUNDA.

• Daughters of Power, Inc.

40. On or about October 9, 2007, CIS received a Form 1-129

petition for M.R.M that Daughters of Power, Inc. purportedly

filed as the petitioner. The petition stated that M.R.M. would

be employed as a grants administrator. The corresponding LeA was

filed on or about September 27, 2007. Both the LCA and the Form

1-129 were signed in the name of D.J. On the LCA, the employer

address was listed as 332 North Doheny Drive in Beverly Hills,

~alifornia. The mailing address on the Form 1-129 was 3699

Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-10.

41. On or about May 17, 2010, SA Castro'and I interviewed

M.R.M. at her place of employment in Los Angeles. During this

interview, M.R.M. stated the following:

a. In April 2007, M.R.M. entered the united States on

a visitor visa, and M.R.M. wanted to remain legally in the

country. Thus, M.R.M. went to TABAFUNDA's office.

b. M.R.M'. paid $8,000 in cash to TABAFUNDA for an H1-

B visa. TABAFUNDA told M.R.M. that the sponsoring company was

Daughters of Power and that the position was a grants

administrator. M.R.M. never worked for Daughters of Power.

22


42. On or about May 5, 2010, SA Castro and I drove to the

employer address listed on the LCA, 332 North Doheny Drive in

Beverly Hills. At that time, we saw that the address was a

single-story residence.

• The Boy Scouts of America

43. I have reviewed the CIS files and accompanying

documentation for petitions filed for the Boy Scouts of America

("BSA") and learned the following:

a. On or about December 8, 2008, CIS received a Form

I-129 petition for A.B.F. A corresponding LCA was filed on or

about November 25, 2008. Both the Form I-129 and. the .LCA stated

that BSA petitioned to employ A.B.F. as a public relations

specialist.

b. On or about May 7, 2008, CIS received a Form I-129

petition for J.M.M. The corresponding LCA was filed on or about

May 5, 2008. Both the Form I-129 and the LCA stated that BSA

petitioned to employ J.M.M. as a public director of nautical

affairs.

c. The employer address listed on both LCAs was

located in Irving, Texas. Both Form I-129s stated that the alien

beneficiary would work at an address in Marina Del Ray,

California. The mailing address listed on both Form I-129s was

3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-10. C.F. signed both Form I-

129s and both LeAs as the Director of Operations for the BSA.

23


44. On or about September 28, 2010, SA Castro and I

interviewed L.H. at his place of business in Van Nuys,

California. L.H. provided the following:

a. L.H. had been the Chief Operations Officer for the

BSA for about three weeks, but he had worked for the Western Los

Angeles County Council for about 12 years. L.H. stated that the

BSA'S national office is located in Irving, Texas.

b. L.H. was involved in the hiring process for the

BSA. The c'ouncil hired only U.S. citizens or permanent

residents. The council did not hire individuals from abroad and

had not filed any immigration applications for any foreign

workers; The BSA'S national office in Texas did not conduct any

hiring for its local councils.

c. L.H. did not know C.F. (who had purportedly signed

the immigration petitions). L.H. stated that C.F.'s alleged job

position of "Director of Operations" did not exist.

d. L:H. stated that the BSA had an office in Marina

Del Rey. The office was primarily used for sea 'scouting

activities and only had one employee, the Sea-Based Director.

BSA'closed the office about three years beforehand.

e. L.H. was shown J.M.M.'s file. L.H. did not

recognize J.M.M.'s name or his passport photograph. L.H. also

stated that the Los Angeles County Council did not have a

director of nautical affairs position.

24


f. L.H. was also shown F.A.B.'s file. L.H. did not

recognize F.A.B.'s name, but upon seeing her passport photograph,

L.H. thought she had a familiar looking face. L.H. also stated

that the council does not have a public relations specialist

position ..

g. Both files contained correspondence addressed to

CIS using a letterhead, which according to L.H .. , was not the

council's official letterhead.

45. On or about September 29, 2010, L.H. informed me that

there was an employee working in the national office by the name

of C.F. This person was the legal counsel in the national

endowment office.

• The C~ty of Hope

46. I have reviewed the CIS files and accompanying

documentation for petitions filed for the City of Hope and

learned the following:

a. On or about June 18, 2007, CIS received a Form I-

129 petition for R.B.R. that the City of'Hope purportedly filed

as the petitioner. The corresponding LCA was filed on or about

April 13, 2007. Both the Form I-129 and the LCA stated that the

City of Hope petitioned to employ R.B.R. as a medical research

coordinator.

b.On or about June 11, 2007, CIS received a Form I-

129 for M.C.H. that the City. of Hope purportedly filed as. the

25


petitioner. The corresponding LCA was filed on or about April

13, 2007. Both the Form 1-129 and the LCA stated that the City

o~ Hope petitioned to employ M.C.H. as a biological science

technologist. ,

c. On or about November 19, 2007, CIS received a Form

1-129 for T.B.C. that the City of Hope purportedly filed as the

petitioner. The corresponding LCA was filed on or about January

31, 2007. Both the Form 1-129 and the LCA stated that the City

of Hope petitioned to employ T.B.C. as a grants administrator.

d. The employer address listed on all three LCAs was

208 West 8th Street in Los Angeles. The mailing address listed

on Form I-129s was 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-10. The

alien beneficiary's work address was left blank, which indicates

that the work site address was 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite

700-10. All of the LCAs and Form 1-129s concerning the City of

Hope were purportedly signed by G.V. as the human resources

manager.

47. On or about May 13, 2010, SA Castro and I interviewed

G.V. at the City of Hope. G.V. provided the following:

a. G.V. has been the Director of Human Resources for

the City of Hope since November 2007. previously, he was a human

resources manager from January 2004 to November 2007.

b. According to G.V., the City of Hope does file H-1B

visas for aliens living abroad. The City of Hope only hires such

26


individuals with scientific or medical backgrounds, such as

researchers and scientists. The City of Hope does not fill

administrative positions with foreign workers.

c. G.V. stated that pe has been indirectly involved

with the immigration process for more than 11 years. G.V. stat~d

that the City of Hope files immigration petitions with the

assistance of MSK Law Office in Los Angeles and attorney Carl

Shusterman in the San Fernando Valley.

d. G.V. was shown the Form 1-129 filed on behalf of

R.B.R., who was to be employed as a medical research coordinator.

G.V. stated that he was unfamiliar with R.B.R. and that the City

of Hope does not have a m~dical research coordinator position.

G.V. also stated that he did not sign the Form 1-129. G.V. was

shown the LCA filed on b'ehalf of R.B.R. G.V.' stated that the

signature on the document was not his signature.

e. G.V. was shown the Form 1-129 filed on behalf of

M.C.H. as a biological science technologist. G.V. stated that he

did not know M.C.H. and that there was no such position with the

City of Hope. G.V. stated that he did not sign the Form 1-129.

G.V. stated the signature on the LCA was not his signature.

f. G.V. was shown the Form 1-129 filed on behalf of

T.B.C. as a grants administrator. G.V. stated that he did not

know T.B.C. G.V. also stated that position did not exist, and if

it did, the City of Hope would not hire a foreign national. G.V.

27


stated that he did not sign the Form I-129.

g. Regarding the work address of 208 West 8th Street

in Los Angeles r G.V. stated that the City of Hope had used that

address since 1999.

h. As for 3699 Wilshire Boulevard r Suite 700-10,

which was used as a mailing address, G.V. stated that the City of

Hope has never used that address. The City of Hope has instead

used two other locations on Wilshire ~oulevard.

• Barlow Respiratory Hospital

48. On or about January 15, 2010, CIS received a Form I-129

petition for A.T.B. that Barlow Respiratory Hospital purportedly

filed as the petitioner. The corresponding LCA was filed on or

about January 12, 2010. The petition stated that A.T.B. would be

employed as a "Utilization Review Coordinator." CIS denied the

petition on or about March 2, 2010, and an appeal was later

filed.

~9. On or about January 19, 2010, CIS received a Form I-129

petitiop. for C.D.C. that Barlow Respiratory Hospital purportedly

filed as the petitioner. The corresponding LCA was filed on or

about January 12, 2010. The petition and LCA stated that Barlow

intended to·employ C.D.C. as a "Health Educator."

50. On or. about February 18, 2010, CIS received a Form I-

129 petition for D.C. that Barlow purportedly filed as the \

petitioner. The corresponding LCA was filed on or about January

28


13, 2010. The petition and the LCA stated that Barlow intended

to employ D.C. as a uPharmacovigilance and Medical Information

Specialist."

51. All three Forms 1-129 petitions related to Barlow

provided.themailingaddressof3699WilshireBoulevard.Suite

700-30.

52. On or about March 31, 2011, ICE SA Castro and I

interviewed J.C. at Barlow. Chief Executive Officer M.C. was

also present. During this interview, J.C. stated the following:

a. J.C. began working for Barlow in November 2009 as

Vice President of 'Human Resources. J.C. and K.L., the Employment

Coordinator, managed the H-1B applications. J.C. stated that

Barlow used a law firm to complete the immigration petitions,

which she later signed. J.C. stated that Barlow petitioned for

alien workers for medical positions only, not for administrative

positions. J.C. also stated that the only petition she signed

was an extension of an H-1B visa for an ICU Nurse.

b. J.C. was shown the WAC file for A.T.B. J.C.

stated that UUtilization Review Coordinator" was not an official

title at Barlow. There was a 'similar position called UCase

Manager." J.C. did not sign the Form 1-129 or the LCA. J.e.

also pointed out that the last name on the signatures was

misspelled. M.C. added that J.C. never used the title uHuman

Resources Manager" as stated on the applications.

29


c. J.C. was also shown the WAC File for C.D.C. J.C.

stated that the position of "Health Educator" did not exist at

Barlow. J.C. did not sign the Form I-129 or the LCA. The last

name on the signatures was again misspelled.

d. J.C. was also shown the WAC File for D.C. J.C.

stated that the job position of "Pharmacovigilance and Medical

Information Specialist" did not exist at Barlow. J.C. did not

sign the Form I-129 and the LCA.

e. J.e. and M.C. did not recognize the names of the

three beneficiaries, stated above, and the names were not found

in Barlow's employment records.

f. J.C. and M.C. stated that the letterhead for

Barlow contained in all three files was not Barlow's official

letterhead.

• People's Resources International Services (UPRIS")

53. On or about December 16, 2009, CIS received a Form I-

129 petition for S.A.G. " that PRIS filed as the petitioner. The

petition stated that S.A.G. would be employed as a human

resources specialist. The Form I-129 petition was denied on or

about January 20, 2010.

54. The Form I-129 for S.A.G. stated the mailing address

was in care of TABAFUNDA, and the address was listed as 3699

Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700. The Form I-129 stated that PRIS

was established in 2001, and at the time of filing, there were

30


five employees. TABAFUNDA's signature appeared on the petition.

55. On or about December 12, 2011, I reviewed records filed

with the State of California relating to PRIS. These records

state that for the fourth quarter of 2009, PRIS filed a quarterly

wage and withholding report that indicated PRIS only had one

employee· during that quarter.

56. On or about November 24, 2010, CIS received a Form 1-

129 petition for G.R.K. that PRIS filed as the petitioner. The

petition stated that G.R.K. would be employed as a public

relations specialist.

57. The Form 1-129 for G.R.K. stated the mailing address

was in care of TABAFUNDA, and the address was listed as· the

SUBJECT PREMISES. The Form 1-129 stated that PRIS was

established in 2002, and at the time of filing, there were three

employees. TABAFUNDA's signature appeared on the petition.

58. The review of records filed with the State of

California relating to PRIS stated that for the first three

quarters of.2010, PRISfiled quarterly wage and withholding

reports that indicated PRIS had no employees.

• More Recent Filings

59. I have recently received information from DOL that

indicates TABAFUNDA or another individual at the SUBJECT PREMISES

has continued to file visa petitions and LeAs on behalf of

aliens. While these more recent visa petitions and LCAS have not

31


been fully investigated, they also appear to be suspicious for -

the following reasons:

a. In February 2011, three LCAs were filed on behalf

of "Ambassadors Emancipation Homes, Inc."" ("AEH"). For all three

LeAs, the employer address was the, SUBJECT PREMISES, and the

email address referred to PRIS. According to the State of

California, there are no EDD records on file for AEH; which

suggests that AEH is a shell" corporation.

b. In May 2011, two LCAs were filed on behalf of

"Pris-Ace Constructors, Inc." ("PAC"). For both LCAs, the

employer address was the SUBJECT PREMISES, and the email address

referred to PRIS. According to the State of California, there

are no EDD records on file for PAC, which indicates that PAC is a

shell corporation.

c. In February 2012, TABAFUNDA filed an LCA on behalf

of PRIS for the position of a database administrator. The

employer address was 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700.

B. Undercover Operations

60. As described below, undercover ICE SA Oliver Ramelb

(\\UCA") conducted undercover meetings with TABAFUNDA and her

associate at the SUBJECT PREMISES. During those meetings, SA

Ramelb made payments to TABAFUNDA and elicited comments from

TABAUNDA, indicating her willingness to engage in visa fraud.

32


61. On or about November 10, 2008, while wearing audio and

video recording devices I DCA met with TABAFUNDA at the SUBJECT

PREMISES. The DC operation was conducted in Tagalog. The

following is a summary of the meeting as translated by DOL

analyst Medy Reyes:

a. UCA arrived at the SUBJECT PREMISES and spoke with

"Mimi." Mimi said she had worked at PRIS for the past three

years and that PRIS was a job staffing and placement agency.

b. UCA asked Mimi about the immigration process.

Mimi told UCA to file for a Labor Certification to stay in the

country. Mimi also stated that once DCA had his case number from

the DOLI UCA could work in the country without being. deported.

c. UCA then' spoke with TABAFUNDA. UCA told TABAFUNDA

that he was present on a tourist visa and that he has been in the

country for the past five years. TABAFUNDA asked UCA about his

work experience. DCA told TABAFUNDA that he studied mechanical

engineering for three years. UCA also stated that while in the

united States, he has been working in construction.

d. TABAFUNDA asked for UCAls passport and an 1-94.

UCA told TABAFUNDA that he gave his passport to a friend and did

not have it. TABAFUNDA told UCA to go to the Philippine

consulate to request a copy.

e. TABAFUNDA told UCA that the process of obtaining a

visa would cost him $6,000, but DCA could'pay in installments.

33


TABAFUNDA said the first payment would be $2(500( and that DCA

would then pay a monthly fee.

f. TABAFUNDA told DCA that she was processing

immigration documents for some farmers and that she could get DCA

a labor certification with the farmers. TABAFUNDA asserted that

this was the only job she could obtain for DCA.

g. DCA asked TABAFUNDA how he could get his legal

paperwork to stay in the United States. TABAFUNDA told UCA that

the only way would be through marriage.

h. TABAFUNDA gave UCA an application to fill out and

told him to cornel back with his passport( a form I-94( and $2(500.

DCA asked if he could take the application ,home ( but TABAFUNDA'

did not allow it.

'62. On or about January 12( 2009( while wearing audio and

video devices ( UCA met with TABAFUNDA at the SUBJECT PREMISES.

The meeting was conducted in Tagalog. The following is a summary

of ,the meeting as translated by UCA:

a. TABAFUNDA asked DCA for a copy of his, passport.

DCA did not have it and instead provided TABFUNDA with a copy of

his I-94. TABAFUNDA advised DCA to immediately obtain a

replacement passport from the Philippine embassy.

b. TABAFUNDA told UCA that she already had a'work

sponsor for UCA and that she would provide ,DCA with a labor

certification as a farm worker. TABAFUNDA also told DCA that he

34


would not need to actually .work on the farm.

c. TABAFUNDA told UCA that if he needed

identification, TABAFUNDA had connection$ in the Department of

Motor Vehicles who could provide UCA with a California

identification card for $2,000.

d. TABAFUNDA informed UCA that she knew someone who

would help UCA obtain a green card through marriage. TABAFUNDA

admitted that she has helped others obtain green cards in the

same manner. (Based upon my training and experience, I believe

that TABAFUNDA admitted that she had participated in marriage

fraud schemes.)

e. TABAFUNDA mentioned that LAWRENCE was her business

partner.

f. UCA provided TABAFUNDA with $2,500, and TABAFUNDA

provided UCA with a service agreement receipt. TABAFUNDA told

UCA that his next payment would be $2,000, and that his third

payment would be $1,500.

c. Internet Service Provider

63. On or about April 18, 2011, I received from AT&T

Internet Services customer account information pertaining to the

email [email protected]. which was the employer contact

e-mail listed on many of the LeAs and the.Form I-129s.

64. AT&T Internet Services records showed that ·the account

was opened on or·about August 5, 2002, in the name of Francisco

35


Tabafunda with the company name of \~Lilia Migration LN. II The

service address was listed as 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Unit 700.

65. On or about November 30, 2010, the internet service was

upgraded from DSL to U-Verse. The customer name was updated to

"Peoples Res Inter Sry," and the service and billing address was

updated to the SUBJECT PREMISES. The primary contact person was

listed as TABAFUNDA.

VI.

ARREST OF LAWRENCE IN THE PHILIPPINES

66. On or about April 6, 2011, SA Alexander Benoliel of the

U.S. Department of State, Diplomatic Security Service, informed

me that LAWRENCE had been arrested and detained in the

Philippines on charges of illegal recruiting. LAWRENCE is still

in custody in the Philippines.

VII.

PROBABLE CASE TO BELIEVE THAT INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WILL BE

FOUND AT THE SUBJECT PREMISES

A. Leasing of the SUBJECT PREMISES

67. Based upon the following, I believe that TABAFUNDA has

been operating a business at the SUBJECT PREMISES from 2002 to

the present. TABAFUNDA has used various offices within the

SUBJECT PREMISES, but she now uses only Suite 728.

68. I have obtained two lease agreements from the Wilshire

Business Center, which is also located at 3699 Wilshire

36


Boulevard, Suite 880. The first lease agreement states that

Francisco Nana Tabafunda l the husband of TABAFUNDA, leased 3699

Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700-28 beginning August 1, 2002. The

corresponding lease application states that the lessee's company

is PRIS, and the partners of the company are listed as TABAFUNDA I

Domingo Aguilar.1 and Frank Tabafunda. The second lease agreement

states that TABAFUNDA leased Suite 700-10 of 3699 Wilshire

Boulevard beginning February 1, 2004. TABAFUNDA signed the

agreement as "President. 1f

69. On or about December 1, 2011, the property manager for

the Wilshire Business Center provided me with a letter from

TABAFUNDA. The letter was printed on a page with PRIS

letterhead, and it was dated November 1, 2011. In this letter I

TABAFUNDA stated that PRIS wanted to terminate its lease for

Suite 700-30 of 3699 Wilshire Boulevard due to "the change in the

economic situation. 1/ TABAFUNDA also stated that PRIS would

continue to lease Suite 700-28 of 3699 Wilshire Boulevard.

B. Recent visits to the SUBJECT PREMISES

70. On or about March 13, 2012 1 a confidential informant

("CI If ) made a recorded telephone call to PRIS, and the CI spoke

with "Lily.1f The CI told "Lilylf that he was an alien who wanted

to obtain lawful status in the United States. At that time,

"Lily" provided no answers that indicated PRIS was engaging in

unlawful activity. However, the conversation with "Lily/'

37


indicated that PRIS was still in business and still filing visa

petitions. for aliens.

71. On or about March 29, 2012, the CI went to the SUBJECT

PREMISES wearing a concealed audio and video recording device l to

meet with TABAFUNDA. ICE SA Maria Castro and I then interviewed

the 'CI, and ICE SA Oliver Ramelb, who is fluent in Tagalog,

reviewed the audio recording. The interview with the CI and the

audio recording provided the following:

a. The CI went to the office of PRIS, which was

located at the SUBJECT PREMISES.

b. An older Filipino male, "Romy," was there. The CI

asked for TABAFUNDA and said that he wanted to obtain legal

status in the United States. "Romy" told the CI to wait for

TABAFUNDA.

c. The CI waited for a few minutes and then left the

office. Before leaving, "Romy" provided the C:t with TABAFUNDA's

business card, which stated that she worked for PRIS.

d. The CI stated that the PRIS office was a small

office with three desks and two chairs next to each desk. The

office had two filing cabinets with four drawers for each cabinet

and a television set on top of one of the cabinets.

1 The camera in the recording device was pointed towards the ceiling. Thus, there was little to see on the video other than the fact that the CI went to a small office.

38


72. On or about May 25, 2012, ICE SA Darwin Tchan went to

the PRIS office. SA Tchan provided the following information to

SA· Castro, who in turn provided it to me:

a. SA Tchan went to the SUBJECT PREMISES. Just to

the left of the office door, SA Tchan saw a name plate stating

\\People's Resources International Services." The name plate also

listed the number \\728."

b. SA Tchan knocked on the door, which was slightly

ajar. SA Tchan then entered the office and saw an Asian female

sitting behind a desk located to the left of the office door. SA

Tchan briefly spoke with this woman before leaving the office'.

c. While SA Tchan was in the PRIS office, he

observed a black computer monitor sitting on top of the Asian

female's desk. SA Tchan did not see any other computers,

computer equipment, or employees. SA Tchan could not see half of

the office, because the office door opened inward and blocked his

view.

C. Recent Phone Call Regarding the Lease for PRIS

73. On August 14, 2012, I had a telephone co~versation with

June Yi, the Senior Vice President of Jamison Services, Inc.,

which is the company that currently manages the building at 3699

Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles, California. Ms. Yi confirmed

that TABAFUNDA continues to occupy the SUBJECT PREMISES and does

not, lease any other suite at 3699 Wilshire Boulevard.

39


D. Storage of Paper Documents and Electronic Documents

74. Many of the fraudulent Form I-129s and LCAs{ including

those discussed herein{ were filed many years ago{ but; some of

these documents were filed with the DOL and CIS as recently as

2011 and February 2012, as discussed above. The mailing

addresses on these applic~tions and petitions indicate that the

documents were generated at the SUBJECT PREMISES. Based upon my

training and experience, I know that individuals who file visa

petitions, whether genuine or fraudulent { tend to keep copies of

the documents filed with the DOL and CIS. I also know that

individuals tend to keep these records months and years after

filing the documents with DOL and CIS. Thus, I believe that

copies of many of the documents discussed above will be located

within the office at the SUBJECT PREMISES that is controlled by

TABAFUNDA and LAWRENCE.

75. Many of the LeAs were filed electronically. Based upon

my training and experience, I know that LCAs are filed

electronically via the Internet, and the documents are sent from

the computers that are used by the petitioners or the individuals

hired by the petitioner to generate the LCAs. I also know that

individuals tend to keep electronic copies of documents stored on

computer hard drives, computer disks{ and other portable storage

devices for months and years after the documents were filed.

Thus, based upon my training and experience, there is reason to

40


believe that electronic copies of these LCAs would still be saved

on the computers or other digital media located with the office

of the SUBJECT PREMISES.

76. Furthermore, it is commonplace for other documents to

be generated on a computer, such as the completed Form I-129

petitions and documents in support of the petitions. In this

case, documents filed in support of many Form I-129s look very

similar. The typeface, use of bold text in certain places, and

the organization of , the documents all look very similar, but the

heading 0f the documents concern different companies. These

consistencies in documents indicate that they were generated on

the same computer. Based upon my training and experience, I

know that individuals tend to keep electronic copies of Form 1-

129s and supporting documentation stored on computer hard drives,

computer disks, and other portable storage devices for months and

years after the documents were filed. Thus, based upon my

training and experience, I believe that such documents may still

be electronically saved on the computers or other digital devices

located within the office of the SUBJECT PREMISES.

VIII.

TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE ON DIGITAL DEVICES

77. As used herein, the term "digital device" includes any

electronic system or device capable of storing and/or processing

data in digital form, including: central processing units; laptop

41


or notebook computers; personal digital assistants; wireless

communication devices such as telephone paging devices, beepers,

and mobile telephones; peripheral input/output devices such as

keyboards, printers, scanners, plotters, monitors, and drives

intended for removable media; related communications devices such

as modems, cables, and connections; storage media such as hard

disk drives, floppy disks, compact disks, magnetic tapes used to

store digital data (excluding analog tapes such as VHS), and

memory chips; and security devices. Based on my knowledge,

training~ and experience, as well as information related to me by

agents and others involved in the forensic examination of digital

devices, I know that data in digital form can be stored on a

variety of digital devices and that during the search of the ,

premises, it is not always possible to search digital devices for

digital data for a number of reasons, incl~ding the following:

a. Searching digital devices can be a highly

technical process that requires specific expertise and

specialized equipment. There are so many types of digital

devices and software in use today that it is impossible to bring

to the search site all of the necessary technical manuals and

specialized equipment necessary to conduct a thorough search. In

addition, it may also be necessary to consult with specially

trained personnel who have specific expertise in the type of

digital device, software app'lication, or operating system that is

42


being searched.

b. Digital data is particularly vulnerable·to

inadvertent or intentional modification or destruction.

Searching digital devices can require the use of precise,

scientific procedures that are designed to maintain the integrity

of digital data and to recover "hidden," erased, compressed,

encrypted, or password-protected data. As a result, a controlled

environment, such as a law enforcement laboratory or similar

facility, is essential to conducting a complete and accurate

analysis of data stored on digital devices.

c. The volume of data stored on many digital devices

will typically be so large that it will be highly impractical to

search for data during the execution of the physical search of

the premises. A single megabyte of storage space is the

equivalent of 500 double-spaced pages of text.' A single gigabyte

of storage space, or 1,000 megabytes, is the equivalent of

500,000 double-spaced pages of text. Storage devices capable of

storing 500 gigabytes ("GB") of data are now commonplace in

desktop computers. Consequently, each non-networked, desktop

computer found during a search can easily contain the equivalent

of 240 million pages of data, that, if printed out, would

completely fill three 35 1 x 35 1 X 10 1 rooms to the ceiling.

Furt~er, a 500 GB drive could contain as many as approximately

450 full run movies or 450,000 songs.

43


d. Electronic files or remnants of such files can be

recovered months or even years after they have been downloaded

onto a hard drive, deleted, or viewed via the Internet.

Electronic files saved to a hard drive can be stored for years

with little or no cost. Even when such files have been deleted,

they can be recovered months or years later using readily-

'available forensics tools. Normally, when a person deletes a

file on a computer, the data contained in the file does not

actually disappear; rather, that data remains on the hard drive

until it is overwritten by new data. Therefore, deleted files,

or remnants of deleted files, may reside in free space or slack

space, i.e., space on the hard drive that is not allocated to an

active file or that is unused after a file has been allocated to

a set block of storage space for long periods of time before they

are overwritten. In addition, a computer's operating system may

also keep a record of deleted data in a swap or recovery file.

Similarly, files that have been viewed via the Internet are

automatically downloaded into a temporary Internet directory or

cache. The browser typically maintains a fixed amount of hard

drive space devoted to these files, and the files are only

overwritten as they are replaced with more recently viewed

Internet pages. Thus, the ability to retrieve residue of an

electronic' file from a hard drive depends less on when the file

was downloaded or viewed than on a particular user's operating

44


system,storage capacity, and computer habits. Recovery of

residue of "electronic files from a hard drive requires

specialized tools and a controlled laboratory environment.

e. Although some of the records called for by this

warrant might be found in the form of user-generated documents

(such as word processor, picture, and movie files), digital

devices can contain other forms of electronic evidence as well.

In particular, records of how a digital device has been used,

what it has been used for, who has used it, and who has been

responsible for creating or maintaining records, documents,

programs, applications, and materials contained on the digital

devices are, as described further in the attachments, called for

by this warrant. Those records will not always be found in

digital data that is neatly segregable from the hard drive image

as a whole. Digital data on the hard drive not currently

associated with any file can provide evidence of a file that was

once on the hard drive but has since been deleted or edited, or

of a deleted portion of a file (such as a paragraph that has been

deleted from a word processing file). Virtual memory paging

systems can leave digital data on the hard drive that show what

tasks and processes on the computer were recently used. Web

browsers, e-mail programs, and chat programs store configuration

data on the hard drive that can reveal information such as online

nicknames and passwords. Operating systems can record additional

45


data, such as the attachment of peripherals, the attachment of

USB flash storage devices, and the times the computer was in use.

Computer file systems can record data about the dates files were

created and the sequence in which they were created. This data

can be evidence of a crime, indicate the identity of the user of

the digital device, or point toward the existence of evidence in

other locations. Recovery of this data requires specialized

tools and a controlled laboratory environment.

f. Further, evidence of how a digital device has been

used, what it has been used for, and who has used it, may be the

absence of particular data on a digital device. For example, to

rebut a claim that the owner of a digital, device was not

responsible for a particular use because the device was being

controlled remotely by malicious software, it may be necessary to

show that malicious software that allows someone else to control

the digital device remotely is not present on the digital device.

Evidence of the absence of particular data on a digital device is

not segregable from the digital device. Analysis of the digital

device as a whole to demonstrate the absence of particular data

requires specialized tools and a controlled laboratory

environment.

g. Based on my personal experience, training, and

information provided by other law enforcement, I know that

persons engaged in criminal conduct, including benefit fraud,

46


upon becoming aware that they are the subjects of criminal

investigationr remove from their digital devices any data and

records including computer files and e-mails that evidence the

offenses for which they are being investigated.

h. Other than what has been described herein r to my

knowledge r the united States has not attempted to obtain this

data by other means.

IX.

ITEMS TO BE SEIZED

78. Based upon the foregoing r I respectfully submit that

there is probable cause to believe that the following items r

which constitute evidence r fruits r and instrumentalities of

violations of Title 18 r United States Coder Section 1546 (Fraud

and Misuse of Visas r Permits r and Other Documents); Title 18 r

United States Code, Section 1001 (False Statements); Title 18,

United States Code Section 1341 (Mail Fraud); and Title 18 r

United States Coder Section 371 (Conspiracy) will be found at the

SUBJECT PREMISES. For the purposes of this list r "petitionerrr

refers to a company submitting a visa petition, "beneficiaryll

refers to the alien beneficiary of that petition.

a. Documents related to immigrant and non-immigrant

employment-based visa petitions for the period from 2003 to the

date of'execution of the search warrant.

47


b. Documents submitted or to be submitted to the DOL,

including, but not limited to Forms ETA-9035 and ETA-9035E (Labor

Condition Application or "LCA") and associated correspondence and


c. Documents submitted to, to be submitted to, or

received by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service

("INS"), CIS, or DHS, including, but not limited to Forms I-129

(Nonimmigrant Petition for Temporary Alien Worker), letters from

potential or current employers in support of such forms (drafts

and final), associated correspondence, approval notices, and


d. Documents or files related to the following

business names:

(a) People's Resources International Services ("PRIS");

(b) Ambassadors Emancipation Homes, Inc.

(c) Barlow Respiratory Hospital;

(d) Boy Scouts of America;

(e) City of Hope;

(f) Daughter of Powers, Inc.;

(g) Global Royal Services;

(h) Great Beginning for Black Babies, Inc.;

(i) National Veterans Foundation;

(j) Pris-Ace Constructors, Inc.;

(k) Rise Outreach, Inc.;

48


/

(1) World Wide Crusade For Christ;

(m) any reasonably similar permutation of the foregoing

business names (collectively the "Employersll); and

(n) any company with a mailing or in care of address of the

3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suites 700, 700-10, 700-28" or 700-30,

in Los Angeles, California, or an e-mail address of

[email protected]. from October 2003 to the present.

e. Documents and files related to the beneficiaries

of the petitions submitted by any of the Employers or any company

with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing address from October 2003 to

the present.

f. Documents related to payments made by or received

by TABAFUNDA and/or LAWRENCE related to the'Employers or any

company with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing address from October

2003 to the present.

g. Documents related to payments made by TABAFUNDA

and/or LAWRENCE or received by TABAFUNDA and/or LAWRENCE relating

to any beneficiaries of petitions or applications that name any

of the Employers or any company with the SUBJECT PREMISES mailing


h. Documents relating to payments made by or received

by any of the Employers or any company with the SUBJECT PREMISES

mailing address from October 2003 to the present.

49


i. Documents and files related to the employment,

personnel, human resources, time records, paycheck and payroll

records of the beneficiaries and petitioners from October 2003 to

the present.

j. Documents relating to the income of TABAFUNDA

and/or LAWRENCE and any of the Employers or any company with the

SUBJECT PREMISES mailing address, including State of California

Employment Development Department documents that indicate the

payment of wages, withholding, and number of person employed for

PRISt contracts with other companies or organizations related to

the filing of visa petitions and LCAs, and associated

correspondence from October 2003 to the present.

k. Bank Statements, checks, deposit tickets, check

registers, credit card receipts, invoices, money orders,

traveler's checks, and cashier's checks showing receipt or

distribution of profits related to petitions and applications

involving any of the Employers or any company with the SUBJECT

PREMISES mailing address from October 2003 to the present.

1. Correspondence, notes, telephone notes, internal

memoranda, appointment books and calendars, and address books



address from October '2003 to the present.

50


m. Financial and operation statements, trial

balances, adjusting entries, balance sheets, income statements,

and sales reports showing receipt or distribution of profits




n. Devices or documents tha~ may be connected with

the pr~paration of the employment-based petitions and related

documents, including: official (or official-looking) seals,

stamps, insignia, letters, letterhead, forms, and writing

pertaining to employment-based petitions ..

o. Keys, utility bills, leases, rental agreements,

and personal papers or possessions showing dominion and control

over 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suites 700, 700-10, 700-28, or 700-

30, in Los Angeles, California.

p. Safe deposit box keys and rental records, storage

facility keys, and all records pertaining to the location,

rental, access, and entry of any storage facility.

q. As used above, the terms records, documents,

programs, applications, or materials includes records, documents,

programs, applications, or materials created, modified, or stored

in any form.

79. with respect to any digital devices falling within the

scope of the foregoing search categories, or any digital devices

51


containing evidence falling within the scope of the foregoing

search categories, records, documents, programs, applications or

materials, or evidence of the absence of same, sufficient to show

the actual user(s) of the digital device during the time period

2003 to the date of execution of this warrant.

80. As used above, the terms records, documents, programs,

applications or materials include records, documents, programs,

applications or materials created, modified or stored in any

form, including in digital form on any digital device and any

forensic copies thereof. As used both above and below, the term

"digital device" includes any electronic system or device capable

of storing and/or processing data in digital form, including:

central processing units; laptop or notebook computers; personal

digital assistants; wireless communication devices such as

telephone paging devices, beepers, and mobile telephones-;

peripheral input/output devices such as keyboards, printers,

scanners, plotters, monitors, and drives intended for removable

media; related communications devices such as modems, cables, and

connections; storage media such as hard disk drives, floppy

disks, compact disks, magnetic tapes used to store digital data

(excluding analog tapes such as VHS) , and memory chips; and

security devices.

81. In searching for digital devices and in searching

digital data stored on digital devices, law enforcement personnel

52


executing this search warrant will employ the following

procedure:

a. Law enforcement personnel or other individuals

assisting law enforcement personnel will, in their discretion,

either search the digital device(s) on-site or seize and

transport the device(s) to an appropriate law enforcement

laboratory or similar facility to be searched at that location.

The team of law enforcement personnel, which may include the

investigating agent(s), and/or individuals assisting law

enforcement personnel searching the digital device(s) shall

complete the search as soon,as is practicable but not to exceed

60 days from the date of execution of this warrant. If

additional time is needed, the government may seek an extension

of this time period from the Court within the original 60 day

period from the date of execution of the warrant.

b. The team searching the digital devices will do so

only by using search protocols specifically chosen to identify

only the specific items to be seized under this warrant.

c. The team may subject all of the data contained in

the digital device capable of containing items to be seized, as

specified in this warrant, to the protocols to determine whether

the digital device and any data falls within the items to be

seized as set forth herein. The team searching the digital

device may also search for and attempt to recover "deleted,"

53


"hidden" or encrypted data to determine, pursuant to the

protocols, whether the data falls within the list of items to be

seized as set forth herein.

d. The team searching the digita~ device also may use

tools to exclude normal operating system files and standard

third-party software that do not need to be searched.

e. When searching a digital device pursuant to the

specific protocols selected, the team searching the digital

device shall make and retain notes regarding how the search was

conducted pursuant to the selected protocols.

f. If the team searching a digital device pursuant to

the selected protocols encounters immediately apparent contraband

or other evidence of a crime outside the scope of the items to be

seized, the team shall immediately discontinue its search of that

digital device pending further order of the Court and shall make

and retain notes detailing how the contraband ,or other evidence

of a crime was encountered, including how it was immediately

apparent contraband or evidence of a crime.

g. At the conclusion of .. the search of the digital

devices as set forth in subparagraph (a) above, any digital

device determined to be itself an instrumentality of the offenses

and all the data thereon shall be retained by the government

until further order of court or one year after the conclusion of

the criminal case/investigation.

54


h. Notwithstanding the above, after the completion of

the search of the digital devices as set forth in subparagraph

(a) above, the government shall not access digital data fall,ing

outside the scope of the items to be seized in this wa'rrant on

any retained digital devices or digital data absent further order

of court.

i. If the search team determines that a digital

device is not an instrumentality of any offense under

investigation and does not contain any data falling within the

list of items to be seized pursuant to this warrant, the

government will as soon as practicable return the digital device

and delete or destroy all the forensic copies thereof.

j. If the search determines that the digital device

or the forensic copy is not an. instrumentality of the offense but

does contain data falling within the list of the items to be

seized pursuant to this warrant, the government either (I) within

the time period authorized by the Court for completing the

search, return to the Court for an order authorizing retention of

the digital device and forensic COPYi or (ii) retain only a copy

of the data found to fall within the list of the items to be

seized pursuant to this warrant and return the ·digital device and

delete or destroy all the forensic copies thereof.

82. In order to search for data that is capable of being

read or interpreted by a digital device, law enforcement

55


personnel are authorized to seize the following items, subject to

the procedures set forth above:

a. Any digital device capable of being used to

commit, further, or store evidence of the offense listed above;

b. Any equipment used to facilitate the transmission,

creation, display, encoding or storage of digital data, including

word processing equipment; modems, docking stations, monitors,

printers, plotters, encryption devices, and optical scannerSi

c. Any magnetic, electronic or optical storage device

capable of storing data, such as floppy disks, hard disks, tapes,

CD-ROMs, CD-R, CD-RWs, DVDs, optical disks, printer or memory

buffers, smart cards, PC cards, memory calculators, electronic

dialers, electronic notebooks, cellular telephones, and personal

digital assistants;

d. Any documentation, operating logs and reference

manuals regarding the operation of the digital device or software

used in the digital device;

e. Any applications '. utility programs, compilers,

interpreters, and other software used to facilitate direct or

indirect communication with the digital device;

f. Any physical keys, encryption devices, dongles,

and similar physical items that are necessary to gain access to

the digital device or data stored on the digital device; and

56

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:81t (_

83. The special procedures relating to digital media found

in this warrant govern only the search of digital media pursuant

to the authority co~ferred by this warrant and do not apply to

any search of digital media pursuant to any other court order.

X.

CONCLUSION

84. Based upon the information set forth above and my

training and experience, I believe there is probable cause to

search the premises located at 3699 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700-28,

Los Angeles, California 90010, for evidence, fruits, and

instrumentalities of violations of Title 18, United States Code,

Section 1546 (Fraud and Misuse of Visas, Permits, and Other

Documents); Title 18, United States -Code, Section 1001 (False

-Statements); Title 18, United States Code Section 1341 (Mail

II

/1

57


Fraud); Title 18, United States Code, Section 371 (Conspiracy);

and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2(b) (Causing Acts to

be Done) .

I declare that the foregoing is true and correct to the best

of my knowledge and belief.

Cynthia Penllla Special Agent U.S. Department of

Subscribed and sworn before me

this ~ day of August 2012.

ANDREW J. WISTR1CH

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

58

Labor

Case 2:12-mj-02387-DUTY Document 1 Filed 10/16/12 of 83 Page ID #:83f., , I F- .. ~.

t: .~, . 'u' rc,~ (Vnhf'l j:.1"'(,~d~lUl~iV(f'· O"iJRni'i:j!l>\'(,"'Kl"el 'IPl oorn _ ,:/ ,... w '. ~.~J!' ..... oJ 'd'.. . . ..::; .... :-..' ~ .• 'i.!.. ,.

6. U~m'i:ies. ' -,..' ,

" 7. J 2lnitorial Service. "

Full use of Executive Kitchen facility. '.'

8. 9. On-Site Professional Management. .

-lI». (Q)1fJHfER §EN.VJfCE§ A VAILA-lfBLE: .

l. Photocopy services (at reasonable rates) .. 2. Facsimile services (at reasoriable rates).

. . ~ .. '." .. ~

• i "!i 4 ....

"

f" " -~.

:{ 'v .,.,

N \, L, a "1 , 0 -0

~ "2. ~ , .

• ··f·1

;.

·1

.. ..

, . . ..

, .