| Turkish Woman Charged With
Using Kalder To Defraud Now Ex
Parte Fight
by
Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book
Substack
SDNY
COURTHOUSE, Jan
15 – A businesswoman is
charged with using her
company, Kalder, to commit
fraud in connection with her
model of embedding cash-back
and rewards programs directly
into the websites of clients,
including for example two
Brazilian sports teams.
She had a
proceeding on January 6 before
U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan. Inner
City Press was
there.
The AUSA
describe a laptop extraction
so big it cannot be viewed on
government computers, and
subpoenas out to the two
Brazilian teams. The defendant
is a Turkish national, she
said, necessitating
interpretation beyond Google
Translate. Also, the
defendant's company and its
law firm are being slow in
complying with a grand jury
subpoena.
The
defense opposed any exclusion
of time under the Speedy Trial
Act. Judge Kaplan called it a
serious motion - and for that
reason said he would exclude
time until the motion is
decided.
On January 8 the
US Attorney's Office wrote in
that it arrested her when it
did because as a non citizen
it was concerned that another
opportunity to arrest her in
the US might not have
occurred.
On January 12
putting in a notice of
appearance to represent Guven
was Danielle Sassoon formerly
of the US Attorney's Office
(including the SBF and Eric
Adams prosecutions), now at
Clement & Murphy in DC.
And the other defense
attorneys?
On January 15,
this order: "ORDER as to Gokce
Guven: 1. The government shall
recaption its motion papers
with the caption of this case
and shall file them under seal
in this case. The portion of
those papers that was
submitted ex parte shall
remain temporarily ex parte
pending a determination of any
dispute as to whether they
should remain permanently ex
parte. 2. Any papers in
opposition to the government's
motion, and any reply papers
in support thereof, shall be
filed no later than January 22
and January 26, 2026,
respectively. 3. Nothing
herein shall be construed as a
ruling, one way or the other,
as to whether defendant has
standing to oppose the
government's motion. 4.
[Non-party name redacted] is
not here by made a party to
this case nor given any rights
to participate herein except
to the extent that it may be
heard with respect to the
government's pending motion to
compel compliance with the
subpoenas. (Responses due by
1/22/2026. Replies due by
1/26/2026) (Signed by Judge
Lewis A. Kaplan on
1/15/2026)."
More on X for
Subscribers here
and on Substack here
The case is
USA v. Guven, 1:25-cr-592
(Kaplan)
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station,
NY NY 10013
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2026 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
