This document is available in two formats: this web page (for browsing content) and PDF (comparable to original document formatting). To view the PDF you will need Acrobat Reader, which may be downloaded from the Adobe site. For an official signed copy, please contact the Antitrust Documents Group.


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
ROBIN R. TAYLOR
RUSSELL L. CARLBERG
Assistant U.S. Attorneys
501 "I" Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone: (916) 554-2700

BARBARA J. NELSON
RICHARD B. COHEN
ALBERT B. SAMBAT
Trial Attorneys
U.S. Department of Justice
Antitrust Division
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Room 10-0101
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 436-6660

    
FILED

JUN 24 2010

CLERK, U.S, DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BY ___________________________________________
DEPUTY CLERK

 



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA




UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,    

                  Plaintiff,

                  v.

THEODORE B. HUTZ

                  Defendant.


)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)         
No. 2:10-CR-00238-EJG

VIOLATION: 15 U.S.C. 1 - Bid Rigging



INFORMATION

The United States Attorney charges

THEODORE B. HUTZ

defendant herein, as follows:

  1. Beginning in or about February 2009 and continuing until in or about October 2009, the defendant THEODORE B. HUTZ and co-conspirators entered into and engaged in a combination and conspiracy to suppress and restrain competition by rigging bids to obtain selected real estate offered at San Joaquin county, California public real estate auctions in the Eastern District of California, in unreasonable restraint of interstate trade and commerce, in violation of the Sherman Act, Title 15, United States Code, Section 1.
  2. The charged combination and conspiracy consisted of a continuing agreement, understanding, and concert of action among the defendant and coconspirators, the substantial terms of which were:
    1. to suppress competition by agreeing to refrain from full competitive bidding against each other to obtain selected real estate offered at San Joaquin County, California public real estate auctions;
    2. to make payoffs to one another in return for suppressing competition for the selected real estate offered at the public real estate auctions; and
    3. to obtain title to real estate sold at noncompetitive, rigged prices.
  3. For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and conspiracy, the defendant and co-conspirators did those things that they combined and conspired to do, including, among other things:
    1. agreeing, during meetings, conversations, and communications, to rig bids to obtain selected real estate offered at San Joaquin County, California public real estate auctions;
    2. designating, in various ways, which conspirator would bid for the selected real estate at the public real estate auctions for the group of conspirators;
    3. bidding at noncompetitive amounts or refraining from bidding for the selected real estate at the public real estate auctions;
    4. in many instances, holding private auctions, open only to members of the conspiracy, to rebid for the selected real estate obtained at the public real estate auctions;
    5. awarding properties to the conspirators who submitted the highest bids at the private auctions; and
    6. distributing the proceeds of the private auctions as payoffs, based upon a predetermined formula agreed upon by the members of the conspiracy.
  4. Various corporations and individuals, not made defendants in this Information, participated as coconspirators in the offense charged in this Information and performed acts and made statements in furtherance of it.
  5. During the period covered by this Information, the business activities of the defendant and coconspirators that are the subject of this Information were within the flow of, and substantially affected, interstate trade and commerce. For example, mortgage holders located in states other than California held mortgages, appointed trustees, and received proceeds from the public auctions that were subject to the bid-rigging agreement.

All in violation of Title 15, united States Code, Section 1.



Dated:    Respectfully submitted,

  Benjamin B. Wagner
  United States Attorney



   By:  _/s/__ROBIN R. TAYLOR______________
  ROBIN R. TAYLOR
  RUSSELL L. CARLBERG
  Assistant U.S. Attorneys


  Christine A. Varney
  Assistant Attorney General

By:  _/s/__BARBARA J. NELSON______________
  BARBARA J. NELSON
  RICHARD B. COHEN
  ALBERT B. SAMBAT
  Trial Attorneys
  U. S. Department of Justice
  Antitrust Division