Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01290/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01290-1/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

1

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

KRISTIN S. DOOR, SBN 84307

Assistant United States Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916)554-2723

Attorneys for Plaintiff

United States of America

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 2:07-CV-1290 GEB/GGH

)

Plaintiff, ) 

) JOINT STATUS REPORT, 

v. ) REQUEST FOR STAY, AND

) ORDER THEREON [PROPOSED]

APPROXIMATELY $9,000.00 IN U.S. )

CURRENCY, and )

)

APPROXIMATELY $4,580.00 IN U.S. )

CURRENCY, )

) DATE: October 1, 2007

Defendants. ) TIME: 9:00 a.m.

 ) COURTROOM:# 10

The parties submit the following Joint Status Report, 

Request for Stay, and Order Thereon (Proposed)pursuant this

Court's June 29, 2007, order:

a. Service:

The forfeiture complaint in rem was served on all

individuals believed to have an interest in the defendant

currency. 

In addition, notice of this action was published in the

Inner City Press, a newspaper of general circulation in Alamada

County, and in The Recorder, a newspaper of general circulation

Case 2:07-cv-01290-WBS-DAD Document 15 Filed 09/27/07 Page 1 of 6
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

in San Francisco County. 

b. Possible joinder of additional parties:

Wei Jie Ma and Cindy Woo have filed claims to the defendant

currency, and filed answers to the Complaint For Forfeiture In

Rem. Plaintiff does not anticipate joining additional parties.

c. Any expected or desired amendment of pleadings:

None anticipated at this time.

d. Jurisdiction and venue:

This Court has jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §§ 1345 and 1355. This Court has venue pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1395 and 21 U.S.C. § 881(j).

e. Anticipated motions and suggested dates:

In light of the parties' joint request for a 6-month stay

(see below), the parties do not request that motion dates be

scheduled at this time.

f. Anticipated and outstanding discovery:

(1) What changes should be made in the timing,

form, or requirement for disclosures under

Rule 26(a), including a statement as to when

disclosures under subdivision (a)(1) were

made or will be made:

(2) The subjects on which discovery may be

needed, when discovery should be completed,

and whether discovery should be conducted in

phases or be limited to or focused upon

particular issues: 

(3) What changes should be made in the

limitations on discovery imposed under the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of the Local

Rules, and what other limitations should be

imposed:

As of the December 1, 2006, amendments to Rule 26 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, civil forfeiture actions are

now exempt from the initial disclosure requirements applicable to

Case 2:07-cv-01290-WBS-DAD Document 15 Filed 09/27/07 Page 2 of 6
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

most other civil actions. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)(E)(ii).

In addition, rather than fully schedule this case at this

time, the parties jointly request a 6-month stay of further

proceedings in this matter.

The stay is requested pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1),

981(g)(2) and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i). The plaintiff contends that

the defendant currency is the proceeds of drug trafficking or was

intended to facilitate violations of the Controlled Substances

Act. 

Claimant Ma was indicted on January 25, 2007, in the Eastern

District of California on one count of “Conspiracy to Manufacture

and Possess with Intent to Distribute at Least 1,000 Marijuana

Plants,” and one count of “Manufacturing at Least 1,000 Marijuana

Plants.” United States v. Wei Jie Ma, et al., 2:07-CR-0025 WBS.

Plaintiff intends to depose claimant Ma regarding his claim

and the source of the seized currency. If discovery proceeds at

this time, claimant will be placed in the difficult position of

either invoking his Fifth Amendment right against selfincrimination and losing the ability to pursue his claim to the

defendant currency, or waiving his Fifth Amendment right and

submitting to a deposition and potentially incriminating himself. 

If he invokes his Fifth Amendment right, the plaintiff will be

deprived of the ability to explore the factual basis for the

claim he filed with this court. 

In addition, claimants intends to depose the law enforcement

officers involved in the investigation that led to claimant Ma’s

indictment. Allowing depositions of the law enforcement officers

at this time would adversely affect the ability of federal

Case 2:07-cv-01290-WBS-DAD Document 15 Filed 09/27/07 Page 3 of 6
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

authorities to prosecute the criminal case. 

 Accordingly, the parties recognize that proceeding with

this action at this time has potential adverse affects on the

investigation of the underlying criminal conduct and/or upon

claimant's ability to prove his claim to the property and assert

any defenses to forfeiture. For these reasons, the parties

jointly request that this matter be stayed for 6 months. At that

time the parties will advise the court of the status of the

criminal case and will advise the court whether a further stay is

necessary.

g. Scheduling of future proceedings, including

suggested timing of the disclosure of expert

witnesses and information required by Rule

26(a)(2), completion dates for discovery and

law and motion, and dates for final pretrial

conference and trial:

In light of the requested stay, the parties ask that the

case not be scheduled at this time. 

i. Estimate of trial time:

Plaintiff estimates that a trial of this matter would take

no more than 3 days. 

j. Appropriateness of special procedures:

Not applicable.

k. Modification of standard pretrial procedures

because of the relative simplicity or

complexity of the action or proceedings:

Not applicable.

l. Whether the case is related to any other

case, including any matters in bankruptcy:

This case is related to United States v. Wei Jie Ma, et al.,

2:07-CR-0025 WBS. 

Case 2:07-cv-01290-WBS-DAD Document 15 Filed 09/27/07 Page 4 of 6
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

m. Prospects for settlement:

The parties are unable to assess the likelihood of

settlement at this time.

 n. Any other matters that may add to the just

and expeditious disposition of this matter:

None.

DATED: September 17, 2007 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Kristin S. Door 

KRISTIN S. DOOR

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorney for plaintiff

United States of America

DATED: September 17, 2007 /s/ Stuart Hanlon 

STUART HANLON

Attorney for claimants

Wei Jie Ma and Cindy Woo

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, this matter is stayed

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1), 981(g)(2) and 21 U.S.C. §

881(i) for six months. On or before April 1, 2008 the parties

will advise the Court whether a further stay is necessary.

The scheduling conference scheduled for October 1, 2007, is

reschedule for April 28, 2008, at 9:00 a.m. A joint status 

/

/

/

/

/

Case 2:07-cv-01290-WBS-DAD Document 15 Filed 09/27/07 Page 5 of 6
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

report is to be filed fourteen days prior to the hearing. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

September 26, 2007

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:07-cv-01290-WBS-DAD Document 15 Filed 09/27/07 Page 6 of 6