Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01611/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01611-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Approximately $433,010.00
Defendant
Marshal Rothman
Claimant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

Stipulation for a Stay of Further Proceedings

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

29

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

29

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPROXIMATELY $433,010.00 IN U.S. 

CURRENCY,

Defendant.

2:14−CV−01611-GEB-EFB

STIPULATION TO STAY 

FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AND 

ORDER

DATE: N/A

TIME: N/A

COURTROOM: N/A

The United States and Claimant Marshal Rothman (“claimant”) hereby stipulate 

that a stay is necessary in the above-entitled action, and request that the Court enter an 

order staying all further proceedings until the resolution of the related criminal case.

1. Claimant has filed a claim in this in rem forfeiture action, asserting he is the 

lawful owner of the defendant assets. (ECF #8).

2. There is an active criminal case in the Eastern District of Missouri (U.S. v. 

Kyle Kienstra, et al.; 4:14-CR-00250-CDP) that alleges that these same defendant assets 

are subject to forfeiture as proceeds of drug trafficking. That case is ongoing. 

3. The United States seeks a stay of this civil forfeiture case. The United States 

believes that civil discovery will adversely affect the ability of the Government to conduct 

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

JEFFREY A. SPIVAK

Assistant U. S. Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 554-2700

Attorneys for the United States

Case 2:14-cv-01611-GEB-EFB Document 15 Filed 05/05/15 Page 1 of 3
2

Stipulation for a Stay of Further Proceedings

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

29

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

29

the prosecution of the related case. Thus the United States believes a stay is appropriate 

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1) (“Upon motion of the United States, the court shall stay 

the civil forfeiture proceeding if the court determines that civil discovery will adversely 

affect the ability of the Government to conduct a related criminal investigation or the 

prosecution of a related criminal case.”) 

4. Claimant stipulates that such stay is appropriate. See also 18 U.S.C. § 

981(g)(2) (“Upon the motion of a claimant, the court shall stay the civil forfeiture 

proceeding with respect to the claimant if the court determines that the claimant is the 

subject of a related criminal investigation or case, the claimant has standing to asset a 

claim in the civil forfeiture proceeding, and continuation of the forfeiture proceeding will 

burden the right of the claimant against self-incrimination win the related investigation or 

case.”). 

5. For these reasons, the parties jointly request that these matters be stayed 

until the conclusion of the related criminal case. At that time the parties will advise the 

court of the status of the criminal investigation, if any, and will advise the court whether a 

further stay is necessary.

Dated: 5/1/15 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Jeffrey A. Spivak

JEFFREY A. SPIVAK

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Dated:5/1/15 /s/ James Bustamante

JAMES BUSTAMANTE

Attorney for Claimant Marshal Rothman

(As authorized via email)

Case 2:14-cv-01611-GEB-EFB Document 15 Filed 05/05/15 Page 2 of 3
3

Stipulation for a Stay of Further Proceedings

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

29

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

29

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, this matter is stayed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 

981(g)(1), 981(g)(2), and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i) until the conclusion of the related criminal case, 

at which time the parties will advise the Court whether a further stay is necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-01611-GEB-EFB Document 15 Filed 05/05/15 Page 3 of 3