UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-CR-20400-SMITH

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs.

PAVEL RAMON RUIZ HERNANDEZ,

a/k/a “Pavel Ruiz,”

Defendant.

 /

SECOND PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the United States of America (the 

“United States”) for entry of a Second Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (“Motion”) against 

Defendant Pavel Ramon Ruiz Hernandez a/k/a Pavel Ruiz (the “Defendant”). The Court has 

considered the Motion, is otherwise advised in the premises, and finds as follows:

On October 29, 2022, the Defendant was charged by Information with one count of 

conspiracy to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. Information, ECF No. 1. The 

Information also contained forfeiture allegations, which alleged that upon conviction of a violation 

of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, the Defendant shall forfeit to the United States any property, real or personal, 

which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to such violation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 

981(a)(1)(C). Id. at 7. The forfeiture allegations also included property subject to forfeiture, 

including:

• All funds on deposit in Citibank account number 3290405412, held in the name 

of Pavel Ruiz MJCF LLC, or seized from this account on or about September 

2, 2021;

(“Subject Asset”). Id. at 7-8.

Case 1:22-cr-20400-RS Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2023 Page 1 of 6
2

On April 26, 2023, the Court accepted the Defendant’s guilty plea to the sole Count in the 

Information. See Minute Entry, ECF No. 23; Plea Agreement ¶ 1, ECF No. 24. As part of the 

guilty plea, the Defendant agreed to the forfeiture of the Subject Asset. Plea Agreement, ¶ 

14(b)(iv). In support of the guilty plea, the Defendant agreed to a Factual Proffer, and the Court 

found that there was a factual basis to support the Defendant’s conviction. See Plea Agreement ¶ 

9, ECF No. 24. The Factual Proffer also provided a basis for the forfeiture of the Subject Asset. 

See id.

On August 15, 2023, this Court issued a preliminary order of forfeiture to forfeit other 

directly traceable assets and enter a forfeiture money judgment. Order, ECF No. 37.

From at least June 2020, Co-conspirator 1 operated an investment Ponzi scheme through 

MJ Taxes and More, Inc. and MJ Capital Funding LLC (hereinafter “the MJ Companies”), which 

scheme utilized interstate wire communications, including emails and electronic bank transfers. 

Plea Agreement at 5 (¶9), ECF No 24. At least as early as March 2021, Defendant joined Coconspirator 1 in a conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Id. 

Under Co-conspirator 1’s management, the MJ Companies solicited investments from the 

public by offering investment contracts representing that the investor’s money would be used to 

fund small business loans called Merchant Cash Advances (“MCAs”). Id. The MJ Companies’ 

investment contracts included these representations: (1) guaranteed returns, typically 10% per 

month; and (2) guaranteed repayment of investment principal. Id. 

Defendant learned of the MJ Companies’ purported investment opportunity through his 

acquaintance with Co-conspirator 1. Id. After conversations with Co-conspirator 1 about 

investing in MCAs, Defendant entered into an investment contract with the MJ Companies. Id.

Thereafter, Defendant became involved in soliciting new investors for the MJ Companies in 

Case 1:22-cr-20400-RS Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2023 Page 2 of 6
3

exchange for the payment of commissions. Id. Defendant became one of the “Directors” in the 

MJ Companies’ hierarchy, which entailed overseeing a group of Managers and Account 

Representatives who solicited investors and raised funds in exchange for commissions. Id. at 5-6.

The MJ Companies encouraged existing investors to refer other investors by offering to 

pay commission for referrals. Id. at 6. The MJ Companies also allowed investors to become 

affiliated as “Account Representatives” to raise new investment funds in exchange for 

commission-based compensation, typically 10% per month on the amount of funds raised. Id. The 

most productive account representatives were promoted to “Managers.” Id.

Investors were solicited in several ways, including via affiliated Account Representatives, 

social media, and the MJ Companies’ website. Id. Whatever the form of the solicitation, the 

message was the same: the MJ Companies would use the investor’s money to fund MCAs that 

paid a high rate of return, and the investor would receive periodic payments paid from a share of 

the returns generated by MCAs. Id. 

Defendant, Co-conspirator 1, and others represented to investors, directly and through the 

solicitation methods described above, that the MJ Companies’ generated revenue from the MCA 

loans to pay the commissions and returns to investors. Id. It was represented to investors that the 

MJ Companies specialized in MCA funding for businesses, that there was a team of underwriters 

that vetted merchant loan applicants, and that defaults were negligible so that the MJ Companies 

could guarantee investor’s capital. Id. 

The representations that the MJ Companies were using investor money to fund MCAs, that 

MCAs generated revenue from which investor returns were paid, and that investor money was 

secure were lies. Id. In fact, the MJ Companies earned little revenue from MCAs and, with rare 

exceptions, the MJ Companies did not use investor funds to make MCA loans. Id. Therefore, the 

Case 1:22-cr-20400-RS Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2023 Page 3 of 6
4

MJ Companies’ ability to pay investors the promised returns and repayment of principal depended 

on their ability to continue to raise new investor money, use the new funds raised to pay existing 

investment contracts and commissions, and convince existing investors to roll over their 

investments into a new investment agreement, thus deferring the MJ Companies’ obligation to 

repay investors’ back their principal. Id.

By at least as early as March 2021, Defendant was aware that the MJ Companies’ 

representations about its investment offerings were lies, and that Co-conspirator 1 was operating 

a fraud scheme at the MJ Companies. Id. Defendant willfully joined in a conspiracy with Coconspirator 1 in order to continue making money for himself. Id. On or about March 4, 2021, 

Defendant established Pavel Ruiz MJCF LLC, a Florida limited liability company, in order to 

facilitate the receipt and handling of fraudulently obtained investors proceeds. Id.

Defendant helped keep the Ponzi scheme going by continuing to raise new capital from 

investors, overseeing the solicitation activities of Managers and Account Representatives in his 

group, accepting and collecting large cash investments, and promoting the false representations of 

the MJ Companies as an investment vehicle to investors and to Account Representatives. Id. at 6-

7. 

Defendant fraudulently obtained, directly and indirectly through others, at least 

approximately $42,942,000 in proceeds from investors during his involvement in the conspiracy, 

thereby causing more than $25 million in losses to investors. Id. at 7. As part of this illicit activity, 

Defendant deposited or caused to be deposited fraudulently obtained investor proceeds in several 

accounts, including following account: 

Institution Account Number Account Name

Citibank 3290405412 Pavel Ruiz MJCF LLC

Case 1:22-cr-20400-RS Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2023 Page 4 of 6
5

Defendant, who had access to the MJ Companies’ bank accounts, also arranged for the 

payments of returns to investors and commissions to those raising funds, including via cash 

payments. Id. at 7. For this, Defendant was paid large commissions by the MJ Companies, and 

kept and used investor funds to pay for travel, luxury goods, and social outings while promoting 

the MJ Companies’ lifestyle. Id. at 7.

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the evidence in the record, and for good cause shown, 

the Motion is GRANTED, and it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), the following specific property is hereby 

forfeited and vested in the United States of America:

i. All funds on deposit in Citibank account number 3290405412, held in the name 

of Pavel Ruiz MJCF LLC, or seized from this account on or about September 

2, 2021.

2. Any duly authorized law enforcement agency may seize and take possession of the 

forfeited property according to law.

3. The United States shall send and publish notice of the forfeiture in accordance with 

Rule 32.2(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(n).

4. The United States is authorized to conduct any discovery that might be necessary

to identify, locate, or dispose of forfeited property, and to resolve any third-party petition, pursuant 

to Rule 32.2(b)(3), (c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(m).

5. Pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this Order 

is final as to the Defendant.

6. The Court shall retain jurisdiction in this matter for the purpose of enforcing this 

Order, and pursuant to Rule 32.2(e)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, shall amend 

Case 1:22-cr-20400-RS Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2023 Page 5 of 6
6

this Order, or enter other orders as necessary, to forfeit additional specific property when 

identified.

It is further ORDERED that upon adjudication of all third-party interests, if any, the Court 

will enter a final order of forfeiture as to the property in which all interests will be addressed. 

Upon notice from the United States that no claims have been filed within 60 days of the first day 

of publication or within 30 days of receipt of notice, whichever is earlier, then, pursuant to Rule 

32.2(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(7), this Order shall 

become a Final Order of Forfeiture and any duly authorized law enforcement agency shall dispose 

of the property in accordance with applicable law.

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 20th day of September 2023.

___________________________________ 

RODNEY SMITH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:22-cr-20400-RS Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2023 Page 6 of 6