Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01351/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01351-5/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, ) 2:05-CV-01351-DFL-DAD

)

Plaintiff, ) FINAL JUDGMENT OF 

) FORFEITURE

v. ) 

) 

2002 MERCEDES CLK 320, )

CALIFORNIA LICENSE NO. ) 

4WPD336, VIN: )

WDBLJ65G02F201642 )

) 

Defendant. )

______________________________)

Pursuant to the Stipulation for Final Judgment of

Forfeiture, the Court finds: 

1. This is a civil forfeiture action against a 2002

Mercedes CLK 320, California License No. 4WPD336, VIN:

WDBLJ65G02F201642 (hereafter "defendant vehicle").

2. A Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem was filed on

July 5, 2005, seeking the forfeiture of the defendant vehicle,

alleging that said property is subject to forfeiture to the

United States of America pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4), as

property that constitutes a conveyance used or intended to be

used to transport, or to facilitate the transportation, sale,

Case 2:05-cv-01351-DFL-DAD Document 34 Filed 04/26/07 Page 1 of 5
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

receipt, possession, or concealment of a controlled substance

which had been manufactured, distributed, dispensed, or acquired

in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

3. On or about July 6, 2005, the Court issued a Warrant and

Summons for Arrest of Articles In Rem for the defendant vehicle,

and that was duly executed on July 14, 2005.

4. On January 25, 2006, a Public Notice of Arrest and

Seizure of the defendant vehicle appeared by publication in The

Daily Recorder, a newspaper of general circulation in the county

in which the defendant vehicle was seized (Sacramento County). 

The Proof of Publication was filed with the Court on February 2,

2006.

5. In addition to the Public Notice of Arrest having been

completed, plaintiff gave actual notice to the following:

a. Dai Pak

b. Hui Pak

c. Lina Pak

d. Chase Manhattan Bank

e. Chase Automotive Finance.

6. On July 28, 2005, Jaijin Han filed a claim alleging that

he is the legal and rightful owner of the defendant vehicle. On

June 28, 2006, Jaijin Han filed an answer to the verified

complaint.

7. Chase Manhattan Automotive Corporation (hereafter

"Chase") filed a claim on October 21, 2005, alleging a security

interest in the defendant vehicle as evidenced by the purchase

contract. Chase filed an answer on November 9, 2005, asserting

the same interest in the defendant vehicle. On May 4, 2006, a

Case 2:05-cv-01351-DFL-DAD Document 34 Filed 04/26/07 Page 2 of 5
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

Stipulation for Expedited Settlement and Order Thereon was

entered into between plaintiff and claimant Chase.

8. Apart from claimants Jaijin Han and Chase, no other

parties have filed claims or answers in this matter and the time

for which any person or entity may file a claim and answer has

expired. 

9. The Clerk of the Court entered a Clerk's Certificate of

Entry of Default against Dae Pak, Hui Pak and Lina Pak on June

16, 2006. Pursuant to Local Rule A-540, the United States and

claimants Jaijin Han and Chase thus join in a request that as

part of this Final Judgment of Forfeiture in this case the Court

enter a default judgment against the interest, if any, of Dae

Pak, Hui Pak and Lina Pak without further notice. 

Based on the above findings, and the files and records of

the Court, it is hereby 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. That the Court adopts the Stipulation for Final Judgment

of Forfeiture entered into by and between the parties to this

action.

2. That judgment is hereby entered against claimant Jaijin

Han and all other potential claimants who have not filed claims

in this action.

3. That the defendant 2002 Mercedes CLK 320, California

License No. 4WPD336, VIN: WDBLJ65G02F201642, shall be forfeited

to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4), to be

disposed of according to law.

4. That upon entry of this Final Judgment of Forfeiture

forfeiting to the United States all right, title, and interest in

Case 2:05-cv-01351-DFL-DAD Document 34 Filed 04/26/07 Page 3 of 5
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

the defendant vehicle, and upon the sale of the defendant

vehicle, it shall pay claimant Chase from the proceeds of the

sale, after payment of outstanding expenses of custody and sale

incurred by the U.S. Marshals Service, the following: 

a. All unpaid principal due to Chase in the amount of

$3,091.25 as of April 10, 2007, pursuant to the contract dated

March 5, 2002.

b. All unpaid interest under the contract with a rate

of 6.9% per diem from April 10, 2007 until the date of payment.

c. Attorney’s fees in the amount of $2,124.50. 

5. That plaintiff United States of America and its

servants, agents, and employees and all other public entities,

their servants, agents, and employees, are released from any and

all liability arising out of or in any way connected with the

arrest, seizure or forfeiture of the defendant vehicle. This is

a full and final release applying to all unknown and

unanticipated injuries, and/or damages arising out of said

arrest, seizure or forfeiture, as well as to those now known or

disclosed. The parties waive the provisions of California Civil

Code § 1542.

6. Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and

allegations set forth in the Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem

filed July 5, 2005, the Court finds that there was reasonable

cause for the seizure and arrest of the defendant vehicle, and a

Certificate of Reasonable Cause pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465

shall be entered accordingly.

///

///

Case 2:05-cv-01351-DFL-DAD Document 34 Filed 04/26/07 Page 4 of 5
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

7. Except as provided in ¶ 4, all parties are to bear their

own costs and attorneys' fees.

SO ORDERED THIS 26 Day of April, 2007 th

/s/ David F. Levi 

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF REASONABLE CAUSE

Pursuant to the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture

filed herein, and the allegations set forth in the Complaint for

Forfeiture In Rem filed July 5, 2005, the Court enters this

Certificate of Reasonable Cause pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465,

that there was reasonable cause for the seizure and arrest of the

defendant vehicle.

/s/ David F. Levi 

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01351-DFL-DAD Document 34 Filed 04/26/07 Page 5 of 5