United States v. Lonich

23 F.4th 881 (9th Cir. 2022)

Free access to 20,000 Casebriefs

Nature Of The Case

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Facts

Sean Cutting and Brian Melland were officers at Sonoma Valley Bank (SVB). Cutting was SVB's Chief Lending Officer between 2005 and 2011. He joined its board of directors in 2008 and became its CEO in 2009. Melland was a commercial loan officer at SVB. Bijan Madjlessi was a real estate developer who died shortly after being indicted in this case. D worked as Madjlessi's in-house lawyer between 2009 and 2012. Cutting and Melland conspired with Madjlessi and D to induce SVB to approve, over a period of years, millions of dollars in bank loans to Madjlessi and entities he controlled. These loans exceeded SVB's legal lending limit. Cutting and Melland recommended that SVB approve these loans without disclosing to the bank's loan committee that Madjlessi was the beneficiary. Madjlessi then used the fraudulently obtained loans to pay the interest on preexisting SVB loans. Melland secured a loan for Madjlessi only after Madjlessi (through a $50,000 payment from his wife) agreed to invest in Melland's side business, an energy drink start-up known as Magnus Innovations Group. Cutting and Melland also conspired to conceal from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) SVB's overall financial exposure to Madjlessi. Madjlessi and his related entities received over $35 million in loans from SVB (although the government did not claim all these loans were fraudulent). In a second scheme, Madjlessi and D conspired with Cutting and Melland to gain control of Park Lane Villas East (PLV East), a Madjlessi real estate development. By March 2009, Madjlessi had defaulted on a separate $32 million loan from another bank, IndyMac, secured by PLV East. IndyMac was in FDIC conservatorship, and the FDIC scheduled a sale of Madjlessi's defaulted note at an auction. FDIC rules prohibited Madjlessi and his related entities from participating in the auction. Ds used a straw buyer, James House, and a sham entity, 101 Houseco, LLC, to buy the IndyMac note at the auction and thereby secure control of PLV East. House, the straw buyer, was a contractor to whom Madjlessi owed around $200,000. House took part in the scheme so that Madjlessi would pay the $200,000. Ds created 101 Houseco, LLC solely for bidding on the note, naming House as its owner on paper. D also had House fax to DebtX, the company managing the FDIC auction, an eligibility certification in which House falsely certified that he was not using the auction to 'benefit directly or indirectly' anyone 'who otherwise would be ineligible to purchase assets from the FDIC.' D had Melland transfer $100,000 from Madjlessi's daughter's account into House's business account, further concealing Madjlessi's role from DebtX. Melland and Cutting fraudulently secured for 101 Houseco a $5.4 million loan from SVB. Using the loan proceeds, 101 Houseco successfully bid $4.2 million to obtain Madjlessi's defaulted IndyMac note, which had a face value exceeding $27 million. After the auction, SVB's loans to House were for the construction of the Park Lane Villas. SVB continued to increase the loan amount until it reached $9.4 million. Only about $4.5 million was passed to Madjlessi through one of his construction companies. Madjlessi paid House the $200,000 owed for past contracting work. D later transferred effective control of 101 Houseco to Madjlessi. D became 101 Houseco's sole manager. Madjlessi's wife became the beneficiary of the trust that held a 99% interest in 101 Houseco. Madjlessi and D wanted to refinance PLV East through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac programs for multifamily housing. Fannie Mae had repossessed several condos in PLV East and was selling them at auction. Fannie Mae preferred buyers who would occupy the condos over outside investors. To get around Fannie Mae's preferences, Madjlessi and D again used straw buyers-including House, Madjlessi's personal assistant, and the assistant's two sons-to purchase the condos. The straw buyers then transferred the units to 101 Houseco. Madjlessi and D arranged the financing for these straw purchases through Cutting and Melland. D drafted asset verification letters falsely stating that the buyers had sufficient assets with SVB to fund the purchases in full. Cutting and Melland then gave these letters back to D on SVB letterhead with Cutting's signature. In August 2010, California's Commissioner of Financial Institutions seized control of SVB, ordering that the bank be liquidated and its assets turned over to the FDIC. House admitted wrongdoing and agreed to cooperate. In subsequent secretly recorded meetings, D advised House on how he should testify before a grand jury. House later pleaded guilty to bank and wire fraud charges for making false statements in connection with the 101 Houseco application for the SVB loan and the bid on the FDIC-owned note. A federal grand jury returned a 29-count indictment against Cutting, Melland, D, and Madjlessi for the 101 Houseco scheme. The grand jury returned a superseding indictment adding charges for Ds' legal lending limit scheme and their concealment from the FDIC, SVB's risk exposure to Madjlessi. Ds were convicted of just about everything they were indicted for. This appeal resulted.

Issues

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Holding & Decision

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal Analysis

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

© 2007-2025 ABN Study Partner

© 2025 Casebriefsco.com. All Rights Reserved.