Case ID: f-appx_357/html/0109-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shelley R. OSBORN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-30346.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted Nov. 3, 2009.
    Filed Dec. 1, 2009.
    Joseph E. Thaggard, Esq., USGF-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    F. Ron Newbury, Newbury Law Firm, Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, FISHER and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Shelly Osborn appeals from the entry of a criminal forfeiture order seizing her home. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

The district court correctly found that Osborn’s petition was time-barred because it was filed 71 days after receiving notice of the preliminary order of forfeiture. 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(2); Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.2(c)(2). Even assuming the district court could waive the time bar for excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to do so.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.