Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_97-cv-01173/USCOURTS-cand-3_97-cv-01173-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 152
Nature of Suit: Recovery of Defaulted Student Loans
Cause of Action: 28:1345 Recovery of Debt to US

---

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 DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEBRA REED,

Defendant.

Case No. 97-cv-01173-MAG (JSC)

ORDER REQUESTING 

SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS 

REGARDING APPLICATION FOR 

WRIT OF CONTINUING 

GARNISHMENT

Re: Dkt. No. 9

In 1997, Plaintiff the United States of America brought an action to collect a student loan 

debt from Defendant Debra Reed. Ms. Reed did not respond and default judgment was entered 

against her on June 16, 1997 in the amount of $2,438.30. Nearly 19 years later, the United States 

filed the now pending Ex Parte Motion for Writ of Continuing Garnishment seeking an order 

authorizing garnishment of Ms. Reed’s earnings from the City and County of San Francisco. 

(Dkt. No. 9.) Because the Court has concerns regarding certain aspects of the application, the 

United States is ordered to file a supplemental memorandum and declaration in support of its 

application as set forth below.

DISCUSSION

To obtain a writ of garnishment, the United States must (1) file an application for a writ of 

garnishment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 3205(b), and (2) prepare and file with the Clerk of the 

Court a notice in the form proscribed in 28 U.S.C. § 3202(b). The notice must include an 

explanation of the judgment debtor’s rights, exemptions that may apply, and the procedures 

applicable if the judgment debtor disputes the issuance of the writ. 28 U.S.C. § 3202(b). These 

procedures include the right to request a hearing before the Court within 20 days of receipt of the 

notice. Id. The Clerk shall issue the notice upon filing and the United States shall serve the notice 

Case 3:97-cv-01173-MAG Document 12 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 4
2

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

and copy of the application for a writ of garnishment on the judgment debtor and the garnishee. 

28 U.S.C. § 3202(c). 

Upon receipt of an application for a writ of garnishment, the court shall issue the writ of 

garnishment if it is satisfied that the United States has complied with the requirements of Section 

3205(b). In particular, the application must indicate: (1) the judgment debtor’s name, social 

security number, and last known address, (2) the nature and amount of the debt owed, and (3) that 

the garnishee is believed to have possession of property in which the debtor has a substantial 

nonexempt interest. 28 U.S.C. § 3305(b)(1). If the court grants the writ of garnishment, the 

United States must serve the writ on the garnishee and the judgment debtor along with (1) 

instructions “explaining the requirement that the garnishee submit a written answer to the writ,” 

and (2) “instructions to the judgment debtor for objecting to the answer of the garnishee and for 

obtaining a hearing on the objections.” 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(3). The garnishee is then required to 

answer in writing. 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(3). Section 3205(c)(5) allows a defendant (judgment 

debtor) to file a request for a hearing within twenty days after receipt of the answer by the 

garnishee. 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(5). 

The Court is not yet comfortable with issuing the notice and writ in this case for two 

reasons. First, the application indicates that Ms. Reed was served with the writ application at her 

last known address of 3229 Ashley Way, Antioch, California 94509; however, neither the 

application nor declaration filed in support of the application reflects how this address was 

identified. Given the passage of time and the United States’ obligation to provide notice of the 

writ under Section 3202(b) and 3205(c), the Court must assure itself that every reasonable effort 

was made to obtain a correct address for Ms. Reed. Accordingly, the United States shall specify 

what steps it took to determine Ms. Reed’s current address and when it did so. 

Second, the original default judgment was for $2,438.30 plus interest at a rate of 5.88 

percent to be compounded annually. (Dkt. No. 6.) The application indicates that “the debtor has 

paid and/or been credited with a total of $1,772.00 towards the judgment debt. As a result, there is 

a balance due of $4,690.53, which amount includes interest computed through January 6, 2015.” 

(Dkt. No. 9 at 2:11-14.) This accounting suggests that of her original debt (not including interest), 

Case 3:97-cv-01173-MAG Document 12 Filed 02/13/15 Page 2 of 4
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Ms. Reed has paid all but $666.30; the United States nonetheless seeks to collect an amount seven

times this number. Given that the compounded interest is assessed annually, this amount may be 

proper, but it is impossible to verify without an accounting of when Ms. Reed paid the $1,772.00 

and how the interest was assessed during the intervening years. The United States shall 

supplement its application with such an accounting.

Finally, it is unclear which of the United States’ filings have been served on Ms. Reed. 

Because the writ has yet to issue, the United States’ obligation to serve arises under Section 

3202(c) rather than Section 3205(c)(3). Section 3205(c) appears to apply only once the court 

grants the writ. Under Section 3202(c), the United States must serve a copy of the notice and the 

application for a writ on both the judgment debtor and the garnishee. Arguably, the United States’ 

obligation to so serve only arises after the Clerk issues the notice which has not yet happened here 

given the Court’s concerns. (Dkt. No. 9-3.) Nonetheless, the United States has filed a proof of 

service that indicates that it served Ms. Reed with:

DECLARATION OF MICHAEL COSENTINO IN SUPPORT OF 

APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT, 

and the 

APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT, 

and the 

(Proposed) ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF 

CONTINUING GARNISHMENT and the 

(proposed) WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT

(Dkt. No. 10 at 3.) It is unclear from this proof of service whether the United States served Ms. 

Reed with the attachments to the Application. This ambiguity is critical because the attachments 

include the notice required by section 3202. The Court also notes that the attachments are 

docketed as “errata” even though they are not marked as “errata” on the documents themselves 

and they are not corrections to any previously filed documents. The United States shall explain 

the errata designation in its supplemental filing.

In light of these concerns and questions, within 14 days from the date of this Order the 

United States is ordered to file a supplemental memorandum with supporting declaration which 

answers: (1) what steps were taken to ascertain Ms. Reed’s last known address, (2) how the 

Case 3:97-cv-01173-MAG Document 12 Filed 02/13/15 Page 3 of 4
4

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

amount due and owing was computed, accounting for the payments that were made on the original 

debt, (3) exactly what documents the United States served on Ms. Reed, and (4) why the 

attachments to the Application are docketed as “errata.” 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 13, 2015

______________________________________

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:97-cv-01173-MAG Document 12 Filed 02/13/15 Page 4 of 4