Skip to main content

UNITED STATES FILES CIVIL COMPLAINT AGAINST INTERNET-BASED CONSUMER ELECTRONICS VENDOR ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT

Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and Ronald J. Verrochio, Inspector-in-Charge of the New York Office of the United States Postal Inspection Service, announced today the filing of a civil complaint in federal court in Brooklyn against Yall Inc., a Brooklyn-based Internet vendor of consumer electronics, and its principal, Hang Feng (“Nick”) Wu, for knowingly underpaying postage on massive amounts of mail, causing millions of dollars in losses to the United States Postal Service.

Yall does business through various websites, including Yallstore.com and the online auction and shopping website eBay.com. Yall sells accessories, peripherals and replacement parts such as batteries, protective cases, AC adapters, and cables for laptops, cell phones, digital cameras and handheld game consoles, among other popular electronics items.

The complaint alleges that the defendants shipped tens of thousands of underpaid mail pieces per week to consumers across the nation and around the world and that they knowingly failed to weigh the mail before presenting it to the Postal Service for mailing, while representing that their mail was paid in full.

“The defendants’ fraud was deceptively simple, yet reaped significant benefits over time,” said United States Attorney Lynch. “By consistently underpaying postage, while maintaining that they were meeting their obligation to pay proper postage, the defendants shorted the Postal Service of literally millions of dollars. Making false statements and failing to pay proper postage interferes with the Postal Service’s effort to deliver the mail and impairs its financial viability. In these difficult economic times, we will hold businesses and business owners accountable for underpaying postage and will ensure that the Postal Service is protected from abuse.”

“The Postal Inspection Service will not tolerate misuse of the mail system from those who seek to gain an unfair competitive advantage over others by not paying the required postage to the U.S. Postal Service,” said Postal Inspector-in-Charge Verrochio.

The claims in the United States’ complaint are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability. The United States’ case is being handled by Assistant United States Attorney Ameet B. Kabrawala.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.
Post a Comment
Read more

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...
3 comments
Read more

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...
Post a Comment
Read more