Interesting to note:
In U.S. District Court in Rockford, four defendants were charged in criminal informations and two in indictments.

"Charged in indictments with mail fraud are Eric Inselberg of New Jersey, who works with Taylor Huff Inc. and Pasadena Trading Corp,; and Bradley Wells of Florda, who works with Authentic Sports Inc. and Historic Auctions.

Charged by criminal information with mail fraud are Bernard Gernay of New Jersey, involved with Pro Sports Investments Inc.; Bradley Horne of South Carolina, involved with Authentic Sports Memorabilia Inc.; Jarrod Oldridge of Nevada, involved with JO Sports Inc.,; and Michell Schumacher of Wisconsin, using the trade name MS Sports."

Just so we know what we're talking about, here is the difference between information and an indictment

From a law blog...

"An indictment and an information are two vehicles which serve the same purpose through different approaches.

To be indicted the evidence is presented to a grand jury for consideration. The indictment in and of itself has no legal weight other than that it gets you into court. It holds no evidentiary value whatsoever. All it does is make you appear in front of a judge to enter a plea.

An information is generally used when a defendant, or potential defendant, agrees that there is enough evidence to proceed with the case, thereby compelling said defendant to appear in court and enter a plea to the information, i.e. charges contained therein, just like an indictment. In agreeing to be prosecuted on an information you are waiving your right to have the case presented to a grand jury.

The advantages are that you are cooperating with the prosecutor in not making them do more work than they want to. It also can serve to keep your case a little quieter. Most courts don't publicize the filing of informations unless someone notifies the media. In other words, reporters will go through bills of indictments and report what they choose to. In my situation, for instance, I plead to an information and there was no media coverage until sentencing. (I was a former L.E.O. and a very public figure, so it meant a lot to my family to keep it as quiet as possible. It didn't work for the duration of my case, but it helped keep the public scrutiny to a minimum for a long time.)

The advantages to the prosecutor are many. As pointed out he/she doesn't have to prepare the case for grand jury presentation. He/she doesn't risk the failure of a bill being handed up. He/she relies on you to show up in court as promised. He/she uses the fact that you have admitted that there is evidence to prosecute as leverage to gain a favorable plea."