AO 257 (Rev. 6/78)

DEFENDANT INFORMATION RELATIVE TO A CRIMINAL ACTION - IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT

INFORMATION CJ INDICTMENT
CI suPerseDING

sy: L] comPLAINT

OFFENSE CHARGED
Count One: 18 U.S.C. §1030(b)- Conspiracy to Violate 18 OD Petty
U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(4) and (c)(3)(A); 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(i) and Gj)
and 21 US.C. § 853- Criminal Forfeiture LD Minor
Misde-
OD imeanor
Felony

PENALTY: Count One: 5 years imprisonment, $250,000.00 fine, 3 years

supervised release, $100 special assessment. C R |

Name of District Court, and/or Judge/Magistrate Location
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

r— DEFENDANT - U.S

p Merudh Patel a5 ED

DISTRICT COURT NUMBER /*;~

PROCEEDING
Name of Complaintant Agency, or Person (& Title, if any)

FBI Jeffrey Miller

Oo person is awaiting trial in another Federal or State Court,
give name of court

this person/proceeding is transferred from another district
O per (circle one) FRCrp 20, 21, or 40. Show District

this is a reprosecution of

charges previously dismissed
Oo which were dismissed on motion SHOW

of } DOCKET NO.

oO U.S. ATTORNEY oO DEFENSE

this prosecution relates to a
pending case involving this same

defendant MAGISTRATE

CASE NO.
prior proceedings or appearance(s)
(before U.S. Magistrate regarding this
defendant were recorded under 2—_______

Name and Office of Person
Furnishing Information on this form

KIU.S. Attorney [] Other U.S. Agency

Brian J. Stretch

Name of Assistant U.S.

Attorney (if assigned) Susan Knight

PROCESS:
( summons NO PROCESS* [] WARRANT
If Summons, complete following:

IS NOTIN CUSTODY
Has not been arrested, pending outcome this proceeding.
1) [7] Ifnot detained give date any prior
summons was served on above charges

2) CIs a Fugitive

3) [J Is on Bail or Release from (show District)

IS IN CUSTODY
4) [J On this charge

5) (-] On another conviction

} (i Federal (J State

6) (] Awaiting trial on other charges
If answer to (6) is "Yes", show name of institution

Has detainer [] Yes Ue
been fled? | No _
DATE OF > Month/Day/Year
ARREST

Or... if Arresting Agency & Warrant were not

DATE TRANSFERRED Month/Day/Year
TO U.S. CUSTODY

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS:

(J This report amends AO 257 previously submitted

Bail Amount:

* Where defendant previously apprehended on complaint, no new summons or

Arraignment Initial Appearance
Oo 9 Oo PP warrant needed, since Magistrate has scheduled arraignment

Defendant Address:

Date/Time: Before Judge:

Comments:



d. has been substantially diminished in value; or
e has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without
difficulty,
the United States of America shall be entitled to forfeiture of substitute property pursuant to Title 21,
United States Code, Section 853(p), as incorporated by Title 18, United States Code, Section
1030(i)(2).
All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1030(i) and (j), and Title 21, United States

Kl

MATTHEW A. PARRELLA
Chief, CHIP Unit

Code, Section 853.

DATED: a/ F/IF

(Approved as to form;
SA SUSAN KN;

INFORMATION 4



ALEX TSE (CABN 152348)
Attorney for the United States, Acting Under
Authority Conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 515

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EJ D

C

SAN JOSE DIVISION

CR.17 00069

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, VIOLATIONS: 18 U.S.C. § 1030(b) — Conspiracy to
Violate 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(4) and (c)(3)(A); 18
v. U.S.C. §§ 1030(i) and (j) and 21 U.S.C. § 853 —

Criminal Forfeiture
MERUDH PATEL,

Defendant. SAN JOSE VENUE

INFORMATION
The United States Attorney charges:
BACKGROUND
At all times relevant to this Information:

1. Facebook, Inc. (Facebook) owned and operated the social networking site located at
www.facebook.com, which had more than one billion users worldwide. The company was
headquartered and maintained a computer network in Menlo Park, California, and other locations.
Facebook’s computer network was used in interstate and foreign commerce and communication and was
a “protected computer” under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2).

2. One of the ways that Facebook generated revenue was to allow different entities to post

advertisements on Facebook. The advertisements were displayed on Facebook users’ computer screens

INFORMATION



oOo ND DH UH

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

when they logged into their Facebook accounts. Because Facebook has over one billion users,
advertisers used this service to reach a large number of potential customers. Advertisers created
accounts with Facebook that enabled them to login into Facebook and choose which advertisements they
wished to post on the site. Each advertising account had an email account and password associated with
it. The advertisers had numerous options to select from, including target demographics for the
advertisements and how many advertisements they wished to post.

3. Facebook had several different types of advertising accounts, including “Daily Spend Limit”
and “invoice” accounts. Daily Spend Limit accounts could only post a certain dollar amount worth of
advertisements per day, typically $500 or $5,000 a day. Invoice accounts were not limited to a certain
dollar amount per day; but were limited by the line of credit issued by Facebook and associated with the
account. Credit lines could be over $1 million dollars.

4. Defendant MERUDH PATEL (“PATEL”) worked in a supervisory position at an affiliate
marking company called 4" Gear Media in Rahway, New Jersey, which was owned by “D.L.” PATEL
used his Skype account “Merudh Patel Desktop — Merudh” to communicate with his co-conspirators in
other states concerning the details of the conspiracy described below.

MANNER AND MEANS OF CONSPIRACY

5. The object of the conspiracy was to illegally access the Facebook advertising accounts,
specifically invoice accounts, that were managed by advertising agencies, in order to use the credit lines
of those compromised accounts to post advertisements that were not authorized by the account holders.

6. It was part of the conspiracy that co-defendant “J.R.” obtained the usernames and
passwords and other means of access for the invoice accounts the victim advertising companies
established with Facebook on behalf of their customers. J.R. sent information through a variety of
online methods containing the usernames, passwords, and other means of access to co-defendant “E.D.,”
who then provided access to those accounts to PATEL and co-defendant D.L.

7. It was further part of the conspiracy that PATEL and other individuals illegally accessed
those invoice accounts to post advisements on Facebook that were not authorized by the account holders
and that were charged against the lines of credit of the actual account holders, and PATEL and other

individuals ultimately obtained free advertising in this manner. The proceeds of the use of the stolen

INFORMATION 2



oem NY DW PB WN

RYN NN N NN NN Be ee ee ee ee
oD A A BF YN F&F SOD we IRA DH BF wWwN SK OO

credentials were split between D.L. and E.D., and PATEL was given a bonus from D.L. in return for his
assistance in accessing these accounts.
COUNT ONE: (18 U.S.C. § 1030(b) — Conspiracy to Violate 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(4) and (c)(3)(A))

8. The factual allegations at Paragraphs One through Seven are realleged arid incorporated as if
set forth fully here.

9. Beginning in or around July 2014 and continuing through in or around August 2014, in the
Northern District of California, and elsewhere, the defendant,

MERUDH PATEL,

did knowingly conspire and agree with individuals known as D.L. and E.D. to commit an offense under
18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(4) and (c)(3)(A), that is, knowingly and with intent to defraud, accessing a
protected computer without authorization, and by means of such conduct furthered the intended fraud
and obtained something of value, specifically, credit lines belonging to advertising companies, and the
use of the computer and the value of such use was more than $5,000 within a 1-year time period, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(4) and (c)(3)(A).

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1030(b), 1030(a)(4), and (c)(3)(A).
FORFEITURE ALLEGATION: (18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(i) and (j) and 21 U.S.C. § 853)

10. The factual allegations contained in Count One are hereby realleged for the purpose of
alleging forfeiture pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1030(i) and (j).

11. Upon conviction of the offense set forth in Count One of this Information, the defendant,

MERUDH PATEL,

shall forfeit to the United States of America, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1030(i)
and (j), any personal property used or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the commission of
said violation or a conspiracy to violate said provision, and any property, real or personal, which
constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offenses.:

12. If any of the property described above, as a result of any act or omission of the defendant:

a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;
b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;

c has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court;

INFORMATION 3