USAO Collects More Than $134M Collected from Civil and Criminal Actions in Fiscal Year 2025

CLEVELAND - United States Attorney David M. Toepfer announced that for fiscal year 2025 (FY2025), the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Ohio (USAO) collected a total of $134,018,633.20 from criminal and civil actions. This includes amounts collected for both the district, as well as other components of the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The USAO collected $18,220,994.34 in total, with $9,650,947 derived from criminal actions and $8,570,047.34 from civil actions. In cases pursued jointly with other DOJ components, the USAO collected an additional $115,797,638.84. Of this amount, $57,063.17 was collected from criminal actions and $115,740,575.67 was collected from civil actions.

In addition to the criminal and civil collections, the USAO, working with partner agencies and divisions, garnered $14,523,149 in asset forfeiture funds in FY2025. Forfeited funds deposited into the Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Fund are used to restore monies to crime victims and for a variety of other law enforcement purposes.

"These amounts represent the dedication of the men and women in our office who come to work each day on a mission to make sure that justice is served and victims of crime are made whole," said U.S. Attorney Toepfer. "We are grateful to our local, state, and federal law enforcement partners who work with us to hold both individuals and organizations accountable for breaking federal laws."

U.S. Attorneys' Offices throughout the country, along with the DOJ's litigating divisions, are responsible for enforcing and collecting civil and criminal debts owed to the U.S. and criminal debts owed to federal crime victims. The law requires defendants to pay restitution to victims of some federal crimes, who have suffered a physical injury or financial loss. While restitution is paid directly to a victim, criminal fines and felony assessments are paid to DOJ's Crime Victims' Fund, which then distributes the funds to federal and state victim compensation and victim assistance programs.

Notable cases that contributed to the amounts collected in FY25 include:

U.S. v. Lima Refining Co. - The USAO's Civil Division and DOJ's Environmental and Natural Resources Division settled a lawsuit against the Lima Refining Company for violations of the Clean Air Act. This suit related to violations of federal regulations governing emissions standards. The settlement required the Allen County oil refinery to pay a $19 million civil penalty and implement approximately $150 million in capital improvements to reduce emissions of benzene, a carcinogen, as well as other hazardous air pollutants and volatile organic compounds. The civil penalty has been paid in full.

U.S. v. ex rel Novik v. Cosmax USA et al. - This lawsuit was filed by a former employee of Cosmax USA, alleging that false information was submitted in connection with eligibility for Paycheck Protection Program funds. Cosmax USA agreed to pay $6 million to resolve the allegations. Of that amount, $3 million was earmarked for restitution payable to the Small Business Association. The settlement has been paid in full.

Fresh Mark, Inc. - Fresh Mark, Inc., a nationwide supplier of specialty meat products, entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the USAO, related to a former hiring manager's involvement in an identity theft scheme, that involved undocumented, alien employees working at the company's processing plants. Fresh Mark paid a $3,719,997 penalty as part of the agreement. Pursuant to the Victims of Crime Act, the money will go to the federal Crime Victims Fund.

BBR Investments v. Michael's, Inc. - In 2024, the USAO appeared in a state foreclosure proceeding against Michael's, Inc., a hospitality and catering company, and asserted an interest on behalf of the U. S. Small Business Association (SBA). The SBA's interest arose from a second mortgage between the SBA and Michael's. The USAO worked quickly to establish priority to the foreclosure proceeds and secured $767,773.99 for the SBA.

U.S. & State of Ohio v. City of Youngstown - Pursuant to a 2002 Clean Water Act Consent Decree, the City of Youngstown was required to adhere to a long-term control plan to control the overflow of untreated wastewater. The city failed to meet requirements of the plan and paid a penalty of $739,500 as a result. The funds will go to the Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. v. Mark Brant - The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of Maintaining a Drug-Involved Premises. On Sept. 11, 2024, Brant was sentenced to 18 months incarceration and ordered to pay a $500,000 fine. The full amount was paid and deposited into the federal Crime Victims Fund.

U.S. v. Paul Spivak et al. - The defendant and his co-conspirators were convicted of Conspiracy to Commit Securities Fraud. The fraud resulted in a loss to investors of more than $6 million. In FY25, the USAO recovered over $360,000 in restitution owed to the fraud victims.

Notable cases that contributed to forfeitures in FY25 include:

U. S. v. 8,207,578 Tether (USDT) Cryptocurrency -This cryptocurrency investment fraud scam was perpetrated against victims throughout the country. In May 2025, the subject $8.2 million USDT in cryptocurrency was forfeited to the United States. The final order of forfeiture provided that, "Returning forfeited assets to victims is one of the primary goals of the U.S. Department of Justice's Asset Forfeiture Program." Accordingly, the USAO and the FBI are taking steps to allow all 38 identified victims the opportunity to recover their stolen monies.

U. S. v. Edward Oluwasanmi and Joseph Oloyede - The defendants pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud, Money Laundering, and tax charges related to COVID business loan programs. In addition to being ordered to pay more than $5.6 million in restitution, the defendants also forfeited approximately $715,162.21 seized from financial accounts and properties valued at approximately $1.2 million.

U. S. v. $774,830.00 - Defendant Alexandre Haussmann was driving a rental car from Chicago to New York when he was stopped for a traffic violation on the Ohio Turnpike. During the stop, a state trooper's drug canine alerted to the trunk of the vehicle, which resulted in a search of the trunk and the seizure of $774,830 in cash. During discovery in the civil forfeiture case, Haussmann refused to answer any questions about the source of the currency. This resulted in the district court ultimately striking his claim and entering a default judgment for the $774,830 in favor of the government.