Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 299-1 Filed 11/01/21 PageID.3790 Page 1 of 4
`
`
`RANDY S. GROSSMAN
`Acting United States Attorney
`MELANIE K. PIERSON
`Assistant U.S. Attorney
`California State Bar Nos. 112520
`Federal Office Building
`880 Front Street, Room 6293
`San Diego, California 92101-8893
`Telephone: (619) 546-7976
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`United States of America
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
`Case No. 18-cr-4683-GPC
`
`
`SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF
`
`Plaintiff,
`ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY MELANIE K.
`
`PIERSON IN SUPPORT OF UNITED
`v.
`
`STATES’ RESPONSE TO MOTION TO
`
`COMPEL DISCOVERY REGARDING
`JACOB BYCHAK et. al.,
`INFORMANT
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`I, Melanie K. Pierson, hereby submit the following declaration in
`support of the United States’ response and opposition to the
`defendants’ motion for discovery regarding an informant in this case.
`I state, under penalty of perjury, I know the following to be true,
`based on my review of the files and records of the case:
`1.
`I have been employed as an Assistant United States Attorney
`in the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern
`District of California since 1987. I am one of the
`prosecutors assigned to the investigation and prosecution of
`Jacob Bychak, Mark Manoogian, Mohammed Abdul Qayyum, and Petr
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 299-1 Filed 11/01/21 PageID.3791 Page 2 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`//
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Pacas in Criminal Case No, 18cr-4683-GPC. The case is
`currently set for trial beginning May 24, 2022.
`Based on my review of the FBI records in this case and
`discussions with the case agents, it appears that sometime
`in approximately March of 2013, the Baltimore Field Office
`of the FBI received a complaint from Spamhaus about possible
`IP hijacking. The FBI Baltimore Field Office conducted the
`initial interview of the Spamhaus Source (SS) on July 12,
`2013. In approximately January or February of 2014, the FBI
`Baltimore Field Office transferred the investigation to the
`San Diego Field Office of the FBI. The first interview of SS
`by the San Diego Field office of the FBI occurred on June 2,
`2014. Copies of both reports were provided as discovery on
`December 4, 2018.
`On December 23, 2014, the United States obtained a search
`warrant for the Company A email account of defendant Mark
`Manoogian. On May 1, 2015, the government obtained warrants
`for four other Company A email accounts, and the business
`email account of Daniel Dye. The search warrants were
`provided to the defendants as part of discovery production
`4, on January 23, 2019. The records obtained pursuant to
`these warrants were disclosed to the defense in production 3
`on December 19, 2018. Copies of these two search warrant
`affidavits are filed as Exhibits 2 and 3, under seal, in
`connection with this responsive pleading.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 299-1 Filed 11/01/21 PageID.3792 Page 3 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`On September 22, 2016, the United States issued a subpoena
`duces tecum to the company that employed Daniel Dye. On
`September 23, 2016, the United States issued subpoenas duces
`tecum to Company A and five related firms.
`The United States issued the first of approximately 106 grand
`jury subpoenas on July 21, 2014, and the last on October 10,
`2018. The United States has disclosed to the defense
`approximately 77 reports of investigation (302s) written by
`the FBI during the government’s investigation. Of those 77
`reports, approximately 33 were reports of interviews.
`On October 12, 2018, SS became a Confidential Human Source
`(CHS) for a different FBI Field Office on an unrelated
`matter, and was assigned a CHS number. On October 28, 2021,
`the FBI case agents in San Diego confirmed that their office
`had no form of internal “informant” file on SS. They advised
`that any CHS file for SS for the other unrelated matter was
`in the custody of a different FBI Field Office, and the San
`Diego agents did not and do not have access to that file.
`When preparing the initial discovery in this case (which
`occurred after SS was assigned the CHS number by the other
`FBI Field Office in October 2018), the CHS number was
`substituted for SS’s name on the FBI reports generated for
`this case, as an attempt to redact the reports and protect
`SS’s identity. The government disclosed to the defense a
`report dated August 3, 2021, in which the FBI explained how
`this happened. Also disclosed to the defense were the
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 299-1 Filed 11/01/21 PageID.3793 Page 4 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`DATED:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MELANIE K. PIERSON
`Assistant U.S. Attorney
`4
`
`
`original reports simply redacting SS’s name, so that defense
`counsel could see for themselves that the original reports
`did not contain a CHS number. Copies of the unredacted
`original reports, together with the reports containing the
`inadvertently substituted CHS number, and the reports
`correctly redacting SS’s name, are submitted to the court ex
`parte for in camera review, as Exhibit 4.
`As the prosecutors were reviewing the email information
`provided to the FBI by SS in preparation for providing them
`to the defense as discovery, a zip file was found which
`contained an email from outside counsel for Company A. On
`September 23, 2020, prosecutors stopped their review and a
`filter team took over the review. The materials released by
`the filter team were disclosed to the defense in the
`discovery productions occurring between December 3, 2020,
`and March 9, 2021.
`As one of the prosecutors who presented the case to the grand
`jury and drafted the indictment, I had not seen the emails
`from SS to the FBI until I reviewed them in preparation for
`providing them as discovery. The government’s investigation
`and prosecution in this case were not directed by SS, nor
`did SS guide in any manner the government’s legal positions
`or strategies.
`
`November 1, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
