But while the statute provides for criminal penalties, it, too, does not give rise to a private cause of action or give rise to civil liability. Taccino v. City of Cumberland, Md., No. WMN-09-2703, 2010 WL 3070146, at *2, (D. Md. Aug. 5, 2010); see also Grant v. Prince George's Cty. Dep't, No. CV DKC-15-2433, 2016 WL 3541239, at *5 (D. Md. June 29, 2016) ("It is beyond the court's purview in this civil matter to provide relief under criminal statutes [18 U.S.C. §§ 241-242]."). Accordingly, Count III is DISMISSED WITH PREDJUDICE as to all Defendants.
However, 18 U.S.C. § 1031 is a criminal fraud statute that does not allow a civil cause of action. See El-Bey v. Rogalski, No. GJH-14-3784, 2015 WL 1393580, at *3 (D. Md. Mar. 24, 2015) (citing Taccino v. City of Cumberland, Md., No. 09-2703, 2010 WL 3070146, at *2 (D. Md. Aug. 5, 2010)). Similarly, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 does not create a private cause of action, either.
These are criminal statutes, however, and therefore provide for no private right of action. See Taccino v. City of Cumberland, Md., No. 09-2703, 2010 WL 3070146, at *2 (D. Md. Aug. 5, 2010) ("While criminal penalties may arise under [18 U.S.C. § 241], there is no authority given for private citizens to bring a civil suit for damages under this provision."); Fromal v. LakeMonticelle Owners' Ass'n., Inc., No. 05-00067, 2006 WL 167894, at *1 (W.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2006) (recognizing that "18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242 and 18 U.S.C. § 1341 are criminal statutes and create no private rights of action"), aff'd sub nom. Fromal v. Lake Monticello Owners' Ass'n Inc., 223 F. App'x 203 (4th Cir. 2007).