Indictment
|
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
INDICTMENT The Grand Jury charges: COUNT ONE I 1.Mark Albert Maloof is hereby indicted and made a defendant in this Count. 2.Beginning as early as January 1994 and continuing at least until June 1995, the exact dates being unknown to the Grand Jury, the defendant and co-conspirators entered into and engaged in a combination and conspiracy to suppress and restrain competition in the sale of metal building insulation from their facilities in the State of Texas, in unreasonable restraint of interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section One of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. ï½§ 1). II 3. During the period covered by this Count, Mark Albert Maloof, of Birmingham, Alabama, was Regional Sales Manager for Bay Industries, Inc. d/b/a Bay Insulation Supply Co. and was responsible for supervising the fabrication, pricing, sale and distribution of metal building insulation from the State of Texas. Bay Industries, Inc. d/b/a Bay Insulation Supply Co. is organized and exists under the laws of the State of Wisconsin with its principal place of business in Green Bay, Wisconsin. 4.Various individuals and corporations, not made defendants in this Count, participated as co-conspirators in the offense charged and performed acts and made statements in furtherance of it. III 5. The charged combination and conspiracy consisted of an agreement, understanding and concert of action among the defendant and co-conspirators, the substantial term of which was to raise, fix and maintain prices of metal building insulation sold by the defendant and co-conspirators from their facilities in the State of Texas. 6.For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and conspiracy, the defendant and co-conspirators performed the following acts, among others:
IV 7.During the period covered by this Count, substantial quantities of fiberglass used to fabricate metal building insulation were purchased by co-conspirator corporations from suppliers located outside the State of Texas and transported into the State of Texas. 8.During the period covered by this Count, the defendant and co-conspirator corporations transported and sold metal building insulation fabricated in the State of Texas to locations outside the State of Texas. 9.The business activities of the defendant and co-conspirators that are the subject of this Count were within the flow of, and substantially affected, interstate trade and commerce. V 10.The combination and conspiracy charged in this Count was formed and carried out, in part, within the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, within the five years preceding the return of this Indictment. ALL IN VIOLATION OF TITLE 15 U.S.C. ï½§ 1. The Grand Jury further charges: COUNT TWO 1.Mark Albert Maloof is hereby indicted and made a defendant in this Count. 2.Each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Count One of this Indictment is here realleged with the same force and effect as if fully set forth in this Count. I 3.Beginning as early as January 1994 and continuing at least until June 1995, the exact dates being unknown to the Grand Jury, in the Southern District of Texas, the defendant and co-conspirators did knowingly and willfully conspire, combine and agree with each other to commit an offense against the United States, that is, to knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted certain writings, signals or sounds by means of wire communication in interstate commerce, for the purpose of executing and carrying out a scheme and artifice to defraud customers of money by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. ï½§ 1343. II 4. It was a part and object of the aforesaid conspiracy and scheme to defraud that the defendant and co-conspirators would and did agree to raise, fix and maintain prices of metal building insulation sold by the defendant and co-conspirators from their facilities in the State of Texas. 5. It was further a part and object of the aforesaid conspiracy and scheme to defraud that the defendant and co-conspirators would and did deceive customers into believing that the prices they charged for metal building insulation were arrived at independently and without consultation or agreement with competing suppliers of metal building insulation when, in fact, the prices charged were noncompetitive and arrived at as a result of the communications and agreement between the defendant and co-conspirators. III 6.In furtherance of the conspiracy described in this Count, and to effect the objects thereof, the defendant and co-conspirators committed overt acts in the Southern District of Texas and elsewhere, including, but not limited to, the following:
DATED this ______ day of ______________, 1997. A TRUE BILL _________________________
|