Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00845/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00845-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 625
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property
Cause of Action: 21:881 Forfeiture Property-Drugs

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

COURTNEY J. LINN

Assistant United States Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 554-2755

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) NO. 2:05-CV-00845 LKK-DAD

Plaintiff, ) 

v. ) EX PARTE APPLICATION 

) AND ORDER CONTINUING

APPROXIMATELY $234,625.00 ) STATUS CONFERENCE

IN U.S. CURRENCY, )

)

Defendant. )

)

 )

EX PARTE APPLICATION

The United States applies ex parte for an order continuing

the Status (pretrial scheduling) Conference currently set for

July 25, 2005, at 2:00 p.m. The grounds for such application are

as follows:

1. This is a civil forfeiture action. The complaint for

forfeiture in rem filed on April 28, 2005, alleges that the

above-described currency is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21

U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). As alleged in the verified complaint (see

Complaint at ¶ 5.i), several individuals were at the residence at

the time of the search that lead to the seizure of the currency. 

Case 2:05-cv-00845-LKK -DAD Document 11 Filed 07/12/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The United States provided notice to seven of these individuals

on May 20, 2005. The United States provided notice to an eighth

individual on June 15, 2005. The United States continues to make

diligent attempts to provide direct notice to a ninth individual. 

Dan Brace, the attorney for a tenth potential claimant, agreed on

May 4, 2005, to accept service of notice on behalf of his client,

but his client has not as yet filed a claim and answer. Notice

of the action was published on June 10, 2005, in the Daily

Recorder pursuant to the Court's Order dated May 5, 2005. 

2. No party has appeared to contest the forfeiture action. 

Thus, it would be premature at this time for the United States to

conduct a Rule 26(f) discovery conference, and it would be

premature for the Court to conduct a Status Conference. Indeed,

in the absence of a timely claim, the United States may seek a

default judgment, potentially obviating the need for any Status

Conference. Accordingly, the government requests that the Court

continue the Status (pretrial scheduling) Conference

approximately ninety days to allow the government to complete the

process of providing notice, and to allow time for any potential

claimants to appear in the action and file a timely claim and

answer. 

Dated: 7/6/05 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Michael A. Hirst for

COURTNEY J. LINN

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Case 2:05-cv-00845-LKK -DAD Document 11 Filed 07/12/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

ORDER

For good cause shown, the Status (pretrial scheduling) 

Conference set for July 25, 2005, be, and the same hereby is, 

CONTINUED to October 24, 2005, at _2:00 p.m. Consistent 

with the Court's Order Setting Status (pretrial scheduling) 

Conference, the parties shall submit status reports not less than 

ten court days prior to the Status Conference. The government

shall give notice of the continued Status Conference to any 

party who may file a claim in the interim.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 12, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

HONORABLE LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:05-cv-00845-LKK -DAD Document 11 Filed 07/12/05 Page 3 of 3