Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04974/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04974-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

$34,990 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-06-4974 MJJ (EMC)

ORDER RE SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING AND EVIDENCE

On August 17, 2006, Plaintiff the United States filed a civil forfeiture action pursuant to 21

U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). After default was entered by the Clerk of the Court, the United States moved for

default judgment, and the presiding judge referred the motion to the undersigned for a report and

recommendation.

Having reviewed the papers submitted by the United States, the Court hereby orders that the

United States provide supplemental briefing and/or evidence in support of its motion. More

specifically, the United States should explain why there is probable cause that the currency seized

was specifically associated with drug trafficking, and not just with illegal activity in general. See

United States v. $129,727.00 U.S. Currency, 129 F.3d 486, 498 (9th Cir. 1997). The Court

acknowledges that, for purposes of a motion for default judgment, it must take all well-pled

allegations in the complaint as true. See Televideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917-

18 (9th Cir. 1987). The United States may argue that there is probable cause based on the

allegations in the complaint alone or it may submit additional evidence to demonstrate probable

cause. Compare United States v. Currency, U.S. $42,500.00, 283 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2002) (finding

Case 3:06-cv-04974-MJJ Document 12 Filed 04/06/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

probable cause based on, inter alia, a sophisticated dog alert and the distinctive manner in which the

money was wrapped), with United States v. U.S. Currency, $30,060, 39 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir. 1994)

(finding no probable cause in spite of a dog alert and the way in which the money was packaged).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 6, 2007

 EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-04974-MJJ Document 12 Filed 04/06/07 Page 2 of 2