Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-00182/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-00182-3/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 Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

SARALYN M. ANG-OLSON, SBN 197404

Special Assistant United States Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916)554-2700

Attorneys for Plaintiff

United States of America

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 2:09-CV-000182-GEB-KJM

 )

Plaintiff, ) JOINT STATUS REPORT,

) REQUEST FOR FURTHER 

v. ) STAY, AND PROPOSED 

) ORDER

APPROXIMATELY $18,220.00 IN U.S. )

CURRENCY, )

)

Defendant. )

 )

Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its

undersigned attorney, and claimant herein Manh Saechao, by and

through her attorney, Danny D. Brace, Jr., (collectively, the

“Parties”) submit the following Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order, pursuant to the Order filed by

the Court in this action on May 22, 2009.

a) Status of service of process on parties not yet served: 

All known potential claimants have been served with the

Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem, Notice of Complaint, Application

and Order for Publication, and Court Notices. Accordingly,

service is complete. On March 15, 2009, Manh Saechao (“Claimant”

or “Saechao”) filed a Claim to the defendant property and an

Case 2:09-cv-00182-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 11/25/09 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 Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order

Answer to the Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem. On March 26,

2009, the clerk’s entry of default was filed as to Juan Gabriel

Alvarez and Victor Alvarez. On May 6, 2009, Saechao filed an

Amended Claim.

In addition, notice of the forfeiture was published for 30

consecutive days on the official government Internet site

(www.forfeiture.gov) commencing on January 26, 2009, in

accordance with the Court’s Order for Publication, as filed on

January 23, 2009. Proof of Publication has been filed with the

Court.

b) Possible joinder of additional parties:

None anticipated at this time.

c) Anticipated amendment of pleadings: 

None anticipated at this time.

d) The basis for jurisdiction and venue:

The Court has jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1345 and 28 U.S.C. § 1355. Venue is proper in this

district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1355(b), 28 U.S.C. § 1395(b),

and 21 U.S.C. § 881(j).

e) Anticipated motions with suggested dates:

The Parties request a further stay of this action pending

the related criminal prosecution.

f) Anticipated and outstanding discovery:

The Parties request that this case not be scheduled at this

time because they are requesting a further stay of proceedings

for six months.

//

//

Case 2:09-cv-00182-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 11/25/09 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 Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order

g) A written report outlining the proposed discovery plan

required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The

discovery plan shall indicate the parties’ views and

proposals concerning: 

(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; and

(3) what changes should be made in the

limitations on discovery imposed under the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or 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

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

Rather than fully schedule this case at this time, the

Parties jointly request an additional six-month stay of further

proceedings in this matter. The stay is requested pursuant to 18

U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1) and 981(g)(2) and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i). The

United States contends that the defendant property constitutes

moneys or other things of value furnished or intended to be

furnished in exchange for a controlled substance or listed

chemical and/or is the proceeds traceable to such an exchange in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 et seq. The United States intends

to depose Saechao about the claim she filed in this case; her

involvement in and/or knowledge of drug-trafficking; the source

of the funds seized; and other facts as alleged in the complaint. 

Case 2:09-cv-00182-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 11/25/09 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 Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order

Saechao will attempt to depose law enforcement officers who have

been involved in the drug-trafficking investigation that resulted

in the seizure of the defendant property and that is the basis of

two pending, related criminal cases against Juan Gabriel Alvarez

(U.S. v. Reyes, Case No. 2:08-cr-00392-GEB and U.S. v. AguilarGodinez, Case No. 2:08-cr-00570-GEB). Allowing the depositions

of the officers would adversely affect the ability of the United

States to investigate the underlying criminal conduct against

Juan Gabriel Alvarez.

Accordingly, the Parties agree that proceeding with this

action at this time has potential adverse effects on the

prosecution of the related criminal cases and/or upon Saechao’s

ability to prove her claim to the property and/or assert any

defenses to forfeiture. For these reasons, the Parties jointly

request that this matter be stayed for an additional six months. 

At that time, the Parties will advise the Court whether a further

stay is necessary.

h) Scheduling of future proceedings, including suggested timing

of the disclosures 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:

Not more than three days.

j) Appropriateness of special procedures such as reference to a

special master or agreement to try the matter before a

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c):

Not applicable.

//

Case 2:09-cv-00182-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 11/25/09 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 Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order

k) Modification of standard pretrial procedures because of the

simplicity or complexity of the case:

Not applicable.

l) Whether the case is related to any other case on file in

this district, including the bankruptcy courts of this

district:

The facts of the instant action are related to the following

pending criminal cases and involve Juan Gabriel Alvarez,

defendant therein:

U.S. v. Reyes, Case No. 2:08-cr-00392-GEB

U.S. v. Aguilar-Godinez, Case No. 2:08-cr-00570-GEB

m) Prospects for settlement, including whether a settlement

conference should be scheduled and whether the parties will

stipulate to the trial judge acting as settlement judge:

The Parties are unable to assess the likelihood of

settlement at this time.

n) Any other matter that may be conducive to the just and

expeditious disposition of the case:

None.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER 

United States Attorney

Dated: November 20, 2009 By: /s/ Saralyn M. Ang-Olson 

SARALYN M. ANG-OLSON

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

Dated: November 20, 2009 By: /s/ Danny D. Brace, Jr. 

DANNY D. BRACE, JR.

Attorney for claimant

Manh Saechao

//

//

Case 2:09-cv-00182-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 11/25/09 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 Joint Status Report, Request for

Further Stay, and Proposed Order

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, except as noted 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 an additional six months. On or

before May 20, 2010, the parties will advise the Court whether a

further stay is necessary. The pretrial scheduling conference is

continued to June 14, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. A joint status report

is to be filed fourteen days prior to the hearing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 24, 2009

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:09-cv-00182-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 11/25/09 Page 6 of 6