Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca9-13-55556/USCOURTS-ca9-13-55556-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 690
Nature of Suit: Other Forfeiture and Penalty Suits
Cause of Action: 

---

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AKA

Seal A,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER KIM, AKA Chris Kim,

AKA KJ Kim, AKA Kyung Joon

Kim; BORA LEE; OPTIONAL

CAPITAL, INC., AKA Optional

Ventures; FIRST STEPHORA AVENUE,

INC.; ERICA M. KIM; ALEXANDRIA

INVESTMENT, LLC; SE YOUNG KIM;

YOUNG AI KIM,

Claimants-Appellees,

LAW OFFICE OF ERIC HONIG,

Intervenor-Appellee,

and

475 MARTIN LANE, BEVERLY HILLS,

CALIFORNIA, Real Property Located

at, AKA Seal A,

Defendant.

No. 12-56922

D.C. No.

2:04-cv-02788-

ABC-PLA

 Case: 13-55556, 11/30/2015, ID: 9772539, DktEntry: 52, Page 1 of 4
2 UNITED STATES V. KIM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER KIM, AKA Chris Kim,

AKA KJ Kim, AKA Kyung Joon

Kim; BORA LEE; OPTIONAL

CAPITAL, INC., AKA Optional

Ventures; FIRST STEPHORA AVENUE,

INC.; ERICA M. KIM; ALEXANDRIA

INVESTMENT, LLC; SE YOUNG KIM;

YOUNG AI KIM,

Claimants-Appellees,

LAW OFFICE OF ERIC HONIG; ERIC

HONIG,

Intervenors-Appellees,

and

475 MARTIN LANE, BEVERLY HILLS,

CALIFORNIA, Real Property Located

at, AKA Seal A,

Defendant.

No. 13-55555

D.C. No.

2:04-cv-02788-

ABC-PLA

 Case: 13-55556, 11/30/2015, ID: 9772539, DktEntry: 52, Page 2 of 4
UNITED STATES V. KIM 3

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER KIM, AKA Chris Kim,

AKA KJ Kim, AKA Kyung Joon

Kim; BORA LEE; OPTIONAL

CAPITAL, INC., AKA Optional

Ventures; FIRST STEPHORA AVENUE,

INC.; ERICA M. KIM; ALEXANDRIA

INVESTMENT, LLC; SE YOUNG KIM;

YOUNG AI KIM,

Claimants-Appellees,

LAW OFFICE OF ERIC HONIG; ERIC

HONIG,

Intervenors-Appellees,

and

475 MARTIN LANE, BEVERLY HILLS,

CALIFORNIA, Real Property Located

at,

Defendant.

No. 13-55556

D.C. No.

2:04-cv-02788-

ABC-PLA

ORDER

Filed November 30, 2015

Before: Stephen Reinhardt, N. Randy Smith,

and Andrew D. Hurwitz, Circuit Judges.

 Case: 13-55556, 11/30/2015, ID: 9772539, DktEntry: 52, Page 3 of 4
4 UNITED STATES V. KIM

ORDER

The Opinion filed August 13, 2015, is amended as

follows:

Slip opinion page 19: after <we see no reason to place

statutory attorney’s fees awards beyond the reach of the Act.>

add the following as a footnote: <Jurisdiction over claims

against the United States is generally given to the Court of

Federal Claims. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346, 1491(a).

Nevertheless, although we concluded that CAFRA fee awards

are claims against the United States, jurisdiction over them is

expressly given to the district courts. See 18 U.S.C. § 983;

§ 28 U.S.C. 2465.>

With this amendment, the panel has voted unanimously

to deny the motion of Americans for Forfeiture Reform for

sua sponte rehearing en banc and for court appointment as

amicus curiae. The motion is DENIED as moot.

On October 2, 2015, the parties to this case filed a Notice

of Settlement. In the Notice, the parties requested that this

court’s mandate be issued. We GRANT the parties’ request;

therefore, no further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en

banc may be filed in response to the amended petition.

A certified copy of this order shall constitute the mandate

of this court.

 Case: 13-55556, 11/30/2015, ID: 9772539, DktEntry: 52, Page 4 of 4