Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00798/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00798-2/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

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

STEPHANIE HAMILTON BORCHERS

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Courthouse

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, California 93721

Telephone: (559) 497-4000

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPROXIMATELY $23,500.00 IN U.S.

CURRENCY,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:06-CV-00798-AWI-SMS

STIPULATED REQUEST TO VACATE

CURRENT SCHEDULING DATES,

REQUEST FOR NEW SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE, NEW SCHEDULING

ORDER AND ORDER THEREON

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff, United States of America and

Claimant Guy Andrew Guerra, and his counsel of record, as follows: 

The Scheduling Conference Order filed September 22, 2006, was prepared without input by

pro se Claimant, Guy Andrew Guerra, and Mr. Guerra failed to appear for the conference or contact

the Assistant United States Attorney handling the case. The Scheduling Conference Order was

issued by the Court on September 22, 2006. Claimant again appeared in this action on November

10, 2006, when his attorney of record, Robert L. Forkner, filed a Verified Claim of Ownership and

Petition Opposing Forfeiture on Claimant’s behalf. It is not clear whether attorney Forkner ever

received the prior Scheduling Conference Order.

Since that time, Plaintiff has attempted to maintain settlement discussions through counsel,

as well as propounding discovery through counsel. Plaintiff recently determined that counsel was

not sure whether he represented Claimant Guerra or not, and received a voice mail from Claimant’s

Case 1:06-cv-00798-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 11/27/07 Page 1 of 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

2

counsel’s office indicating that discovery propounded on counsel may never have been given to

claimant. Claimant’s counsel has also indicated he may withdraw from the case.

The parties therefore request that the current dates set by the Scheduling Order filed

September 22, 2006, be vacated and that a new Scheduling Conference date be set to allow both

Plaintiff and Claimant’s counsel (or Claimant) to propose mutual discovery, pretrial, and trial dates

and to determine who will be representing Claimant through these proceedings. 

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 29, 2007 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

 /s/ Stephanie Hamilton Borchers 

STEPHANIE HAMILTON BORCHERS

Assistant United States Attorney

Dated: November 9, 2007 /s/ Robert L. Forkner 

ROBERT L. FORKNER

Attorney for Claimant Guy Andrew Guerra

(Original signature retained by attorney)

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 27, 2007 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00798-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 11/27/07 Page 2 of 2