ORDER MODIFYING JUDGMENT REGARDING RESTITUTION

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

On February 9, 2017, this Court imposed sentence on Jermila McCoy, including ordering restitution in a total amount of $992,428.45, with $988,814.16 to California EDD and $3,614.29 to Valdez Clark, as outlined in the Presentence Report.

Jermila McCoy, through counsel, filed a timely Motion to modify Judgment with regard to the restitution ordered to Valdez Clark. Dkt. 121. As Ms. McCoy's Motion noted, while Mr. Clark made a request for $3,614.29 in restitution, Mr. Clark did not provide records to document the basis of his alleged loss. The United States Probation Office requested additional documentation from Mr. Clark, but the Probation Officer stated that no such documents have been so far provided. A bald claim for restitution is insufficient. A party seeking restitution must show he was "directly and proximately harmed as a result of the offense of conviction" and how he was so harmed. 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(a)(2).

Ms. McCoy asked this Court to delete the restitution ordered for Valdez Clark from the Judgment at this time, and reserve the Court's jurisdiction to further consider whether Valdez Clark has shown he was entitled to restitution.

The government filed a response to Ms. McCoy's Motion. Dkt. 125. In its Response, the government agreed this Court should vacate the restitution order as to Mr. Clark and issue an amended Judgement providing that the amount restitution as to Mr. Clark, if any, is "To Be Determined."

For the reasons set forth by the parties, this Court grants Ms. McCoy's Motion to Correct the Judgment and Sentence. This Court hereby corrects the sentence and judgment previously imposed on Ms. McCoy to delete the amount of restitution for Mr. Clark. The Clerk is directed to prepare an Amended Judgment that only provides for restitution to California EDD in the amount previously ordered, and provides that any restitution as to Valdez Clark is "To Be Determined."

If Mr. Clark hereafter provides to the United States Probation Officer any records or material to document the amount he previously claimed, the Probation Officer shall promptly provide copies of all such records to counsel for all parties. This Court retains jurisdiction at this time on whether, and in what amount, up to the amount previously claimed, if any, of restitution should be ordered for Mr. Clark.

IT IS SO ORDERED.