How the Boeing 737 MAX fraud charge unfolded

Lion Air Flight 610 crash

Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crash. The Justice Department said the two crashes killed 346 people

Charge filed and deferred prosecution agreement announced

Criminal Information and Deferred Prosecution Agreement, Case 4:21-cr-00005-O. One count of conspiracy to defraud the United States under 18 U.S.C. 371. Under the deferred prosecution agreement Boeing agreed to pay a criminal penalty of $243.6 million, $1.77 billion to airline customers and $500 million to a crash victim beneficiaries fund, and admitted the statement of facts.

Boeing pleads not guilty at arraignment

Justice Department notifies court of breach of the deferred prosecution agreement

Notice to the court of breach of the deferred prosecution agreement. The Justice Department notified the court that it had determined Boeing breached the 2021 deferred prosecution agreement.

Proposed guilty plea agreement submitted to the court

Proposed plea agreement (submitted 24 July 2024, document listed on the DOJ case page as dated 29 July 2024). The Justice Department and Boeing submitted a proposed agreement under which Boeing would plead guilty to the conspiracy charge. The court later rejected it, so no guilty plea was entered.

Non-prosecution agreement signed and dismissal sought

Non-prosecution agreement with The Boeing Company. Boeing agreed to a total criminal penalty of $487.2 million (including $243.6 million paid in 2021), $444.5 million for heirs and beneficiaries of crash victims, at least $455 million in compliance, quality and safety investment, and an independent compliance consultant for the two year term of the agreement. Boeing admitted the statement of facts and that the facts constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C. 371. The Department agreed to move to dismiss the one count information without prejudice.

Court grants motion to dismiss

Order granting the Government's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss. The court dismissed the criminal information. It agreed with objecting families that the agreement fails to secure necessary accountability but held it lacked authority to deny dismissal because it disagreed with the Government.

Fifth Circuit denies families' mandamus petitions

In re Ryan, Nos. 25-11253 and 25-11254, per curiam opinion (Judges Southwick, Duncan and Engelhardt). The court denied the families' mandamus petitions. It held the challenge to the 2021 deferred prosecution agreement moot, found no Crime Victims' Rights Act violation regarding the 2025 agreement, and held it lacked jurisdiction to review the dismissal on the merits.

Fifth Circuit mandate issues