Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00883/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00883-8/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5489 W.

SAMPLE AVENUE, FRESNO, FRESNO

COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APN: 506-

232-27s, INCLUDING ALL

APPURTENANCES AND IMPROVEMENTS

THERETO,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:05-cv-0883 OWW GSA

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER

AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING

CASES 

Discovery Cut-Off: 1/5/09

Non-Dispositive Motion

Filing Deadline: None

Dispositive Motion Filing

Deadline: 1/5/09

Settlement Conference Date:

4/10/08 10:00 Ctrm. 10

Pre-Trial Conference

Date: 3/2/09 11:00 Ctrm. 3

Trial Date: 4/14/09 9:00

Ctrm. 3 (JT-1 day)

I. Date of Scheduling Conference.

December 6, 2007.

II. Appearances Of Counsel.

Stephanie Hamilton Borchers, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney,

appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

Roger K. Vehrs, Esq., appeared on behalf of Claimant John

Rosales. 

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 1 of 10
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

III. Summary of Pleadings. 

1. This is an in rem civil forfeiture action. In its

Verified Complaint For Forfeiture In Rem, the government alleges

that the Defendant real property was used, or was intended to be

used, in a manner or part to commit, or facilitate the commission

of, a violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, an offense

punishable by more than one year’s imprisonment and is therefore

subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C.

§ 881(a)(7). On July 25, 2005, the Defendant real property was

posted with the complaint and notice of complaint. Notice of

this action appeared by publication on January 13, 20, and 27,

2006, in the Fresno Business Journal (Fresno County) pursuant to

the Order of Publication issued January 5, 2006. 

2. On May 19, 2005, a Grand Jury in the Eastern District

of California indicted Oscar Rosales, Gilda Rosales, Pedro

Romero, Marvin Proxmire, and others with violations of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a)(1) and 846 - Conspiracy to Distribute and to Possess

with the Intent to Distribute Marijuana among other drug-related

violations.

3. On July 18, 2005, John Rosales was personally served

with the Complaint, Notice of the Complaint, Application and

Order for Publication, Lis Pendens, Order Setting Mandatory

Scheduling Conference, Notice of Availability of Magistrate

Judge, Notice of Dispute Resolution, Standing Order in All Cases

Assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill, and letter

dated July 8, 2005.

4. On July 18, 2005, Gilda Rosales was personally served

with copies of the above listed documents. To date there has

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 2 of 10
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

been no claim or answer filed by or on behalf of Oscar Rosales in

this action.

5. On August 8, 2005, John Rosales filed a Verified Claim

in this action. Claimant John Rosales claims that he is the sole

and innocent owner of the Defendant real property located at 5489

W. Sample Avenue, Fresno, California, and that the allegations of

marijuana residue on said property are de minimis in nature and

are not in any way connected with him. John Rosales further

alleges there is no substantial connection between the alleged

crime and his property to justify its seizure and/or forfeiture.

6. On September 22, 2005, lienholder Countrywide Home

Loans, Inc., dba American’s Wholesale Lender (“Countrywide”)

filed a claim and answer in this action claiming an interest in

the Defendant real property. Countrywide and Plaintiff entered

into a Stipulation for Expedited Settlement which was filed with

the Court on July 17, 2007. Countrywide has been excused from

this scheduling conference pursuant to the Settlement Agreement

signed by District Court Judge Oliver W. Wanger on July 21, 2006,

filed July 26, 2006.

7. On March 20, 2006, the Government obtained a Clerk’s

Entry of Default as to Oscar Rosales and Gilda Rosales.

IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings.

1. The parties do not presently contemplate filing any

amendments to the pleadings.

V. Factual Summary.

A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further

Proceedings. 

1. It is undisputed that the Defendant real property

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 3 of 10
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

4

located at 5489 W. Sample Avenue, Fresno, California, was posted

on July 25, 2005, after a Complaint For Forfeiture In Rem was

filed on July 7, 2005. It is uncontested that Countrywide has a

lienholder interest in the property.

B. Contested Facts.

1. All remaining facts are contested.

VI. Legal Issues.

A. Uncontested.

1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1345 and

1355 and 21 U.S.C. § 881. 

2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1395.

B. Contested. 

1. Whether the Defendant real property located at

5489 W. Sample Avenue, Fresno, California, was used or intended

to be used, in a manner or part to commit, or facilitate the

commission of a violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, an

offense punishable by more than one year’s imprisonment and is

therefore subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to

21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7).

VII. Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction.

1. The parties have not consented to transfer the 

case to the Magistrate Judge for all purposes, including trial.

VIII. Corporate Identification Statement.

1. Any nongovernmental corporate party to any action in

this court shall file a statement identifying all its parent

corporations and listing any entity that owns 10% or more of the

party's equity securities. A party shall file the statement with

its initial pleading filed in this court and shall supplement the

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 4 of 10
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

5

statement within a reasonable time of any change in the

information. 

IX. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date.

1. Initial disclosures were made by Plaintiff on or about

December 14, 2005. 

2. The parties are ordered to complete all discovery on

or before January 5, 2009.

3. The parties are directed to disclose all expert

witnesses, in writing, on or before December 5, 2008. The

parties will comply with the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 26(a)(2) regarding their expert designations. Local

Rule 16-240(a) notwithstanding, the written designation of

experts shall be made pursuant to F. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2),

(A) and (B) and shall include all information required

thereunder. Failure to designate experts in compliance with this

order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other

evidence offered through such experts that are not disclosed

pursuant to this order.

4. The provisions of F. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) shall 

apply to all discovery relating to experts and their opinions. 

Experts may be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and

opinions included in the designation. Failure to comply will

result in the imposition of sanctions. 

X. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule.

3. All Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions are to be

filed no later than January 5, 2009, and will be heard on

February 9, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable Oliver W.

Wanger, United States District Judge, in Courtroom 3, 7th Floor. 

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 5 of 10
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

6

In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Local Rule

230. 

XI. Pre-Trial Conference Date.

1. March 2, 2009, at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3, 7th Floor,

before the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger, United States District

Judge. 

2. The parties are ordered to file a Joint PreTrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). 

3. Counsel's attention is directed to Rules 281 

and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District

of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for

the pre-trial conference. The Court will insist upon strict

compliance with those rules.

XII. Trial Date.

1. April 14, 2009, at the hour of 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom

3, 7th Floor, before the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger, United

States District Judge. 

2. This is a jury trial.

3. Counsels' Estimate Of Trial Time:

a. 1 day.

4. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules

of Practice for the Eastern District of California, Rule 285. 

XIII. Settlement Conference.

1. A Settlement Conference is scheduled for April 10,

2008, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 10 before the Honorable Gary S.

Austin, United States Magistrate Judge. 

2. Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the

Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall appear at the

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 6 of 10
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

7

Settlement Conference with the parties and the person or persons

having full authority to negotiate and settle the case on any

terms at the conference. 

3. Permission for a party [not attorney] to attend

by telephone may be granted upon request, by letter, with a copy

to the other parties, if the party [not attorney] lives and works

outside the Eastern District of California, and attendance in

person would constitute a hardship. If telephone attendance is

allowed, the party must be immediately available throughout the

conference until excused regardless of time zone differences. 

Any other special arrangements desired in cases where settlement

authority rests with a governing body, shall also be proposed in

advance by letter copied to all other parties. 

4. Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. 

At least five (5) days prior to the Settlement Conference the

parties shall submit, directly to the Magistrate Judge's

chambers, a confidential settlement conference statement. The

statement should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor

served on any other party. Each statement shall be clearly

marked "confidential" with the date and time of the Settlement

Conference indicated prominently thereon. Counsel are urged to

request the return of their statements if settlement is not

achieved and if such a request is not made the Court will dispose

of the statement.

5. The Confidential Settlement Conference

Statement shall include the following: 

a. A brief statement of the facts of the 

case.

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 7 of 10
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

8

b. A brief statement of the claims and 

defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon which the claims

are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties' likelihood

of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of

the major issues in dispute.

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be

expended for further discovery, pre-trial and trial.

e. The relief sought.

f. The parties' position on settlement,

including present demands and offers and a history of past

settlement discussions, offers and demands. 

XIV. Request For Bifurcation, Appointment Of Special Master, 

Or Other Techniques To Shorten Trial. 

1. None. 

XV. Related Matters Pending and Consolidation.

1. This action is related to United States v. Oscar

Rosales, et al., 1:05-cr-0161 OWW. On September 14, 2006, Oscar

Rosales pleaded guilty to the essential elements of Count Two of

the Superseding Indictment, which charged him with Conspiracy to

Distribute and to Possess with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846. This

case is also related to United States v. $8,525.00 in U.S.

Currency, 1:05-cv-1315 OWW GSA, another civil forfeiture action,

and the parties suggest the Court consolidate the two civil

forfeiture actions. 

2. Case number 1:05-cv-1315 OWW GSA is related, as it

involves currency seized from John Rosales. Accordingly, by the

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 8 of 10
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

9

parties’ agreement, case number 1:05-cv-1315 OWW GSA is

consolidated with action number 1:05-cv-0883 OWW GSA. 

3. The new case number for the consolidated action is

1:05-cv-0883 OWW GSA. Case number 1:05-cv-1315 OWW GSA shall be

administratively closed and all papers shall be filed in the

future in action number 1:05-cv-0883 OWW GSA. 

XVI. Compliance With Federal Procedure.

1. The Court requires compliance with the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the

Eastern District of California. To aid the court in the

efficient administration of this case, all counsel are directed

to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District

of California, and keep abreast of any amendments thereto.

XVII. Effect Of This Order.

1. The foregoing order represents the best

estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable

to bring this case to resolution. The trial date reserved is

specifically reserved for this case. If the parties determine at

any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met,

counsel are ordered to notify the court immediately of that fact

so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by

subsequent scheduling conference. 

2. Stipulations extending the deadlines contained

herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by

affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached

exhibits, which establish good cause for granting the relief

requested. 

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 9 of 10
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

10

3. Failure to comply with this order may result in

the imposition of sanctions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 6, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00883-OWW -GSA Document 41 Filed 12/11/07 Page 10 of 10