This disposit ion is not appropriate f or publication and is not pre cedent except as * provided by

9th Cir. R. 36-3. The Honorable Rober

t S. L asnik, United States District Judg e for the Western ** District of Washington, sitting by designation. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. 3 1 8 C AR T ON S OF L OV E R OS E S AN D M U STI C V A SES, D e f

e n d a n t, a nd K A S S I R C O ., I N C ., C la im a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11- 56118 D . C . N o . 2 : 1 0 -cv -0 4 9 2 1 -P A -A JW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia P e r c y A nde r s on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 12, 2013 P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B ef ore: R E IN H A R D T and M U R G U IA , C i rc ui tJudg es , and L A S N IK , D i stri ct 

# FI LED JU N 05 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSJudg e. **

K as sir C o ., In c. ap p ea ls th e d istrict co u rt’s d en ial o f its m o ti o n fo r a tt o rn ey ’s f e e s u n d e rth e C iv il A s s e t F o r f e itu r e R e f

o rm A c t ( “C A F R A ” ) . O n ap p e a l, K a s s ir c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e d in f in d in g th a t it d id n o t s u b s ta n tia lly p r e v a il. W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 a n d r e v ie w d e n o v o , V .S . e x r e l. A . O . v. L os G a t os - s a r a t ogaJ oi ntU ni on H i gh S c h. D i s t . , 484 F . 3d 1230, 1232- 33 (9th C i r. 20 07 ). W e r ever se . T he C i vi l A s s e tF or f

e i tur e R e f

orm A c t( “ C A F R A ” ) doe s notde f i ne w ho const i tut es a pre vai l i ng party, bu tthe S up re m e C ou rthas hel d thatt o b e a prevai l i ng party und era f ee aw ar di ng st atut e, a l i t i gantm ustob t ai n som e c ou rt or de r e d r e l i e f

on the m e r i t s tha tm a t e r i a l l y a l t e r s the l e ga l r e l a t i ons hi p of the part i es . B uckh anno n B d. & C ar e H om e, Inc. v. W . V a. D ep’ tof H ea l th & H um an R e s ., 5 3 2 U .S . 5 9 8 , 6 0 3 - 0 4 ( 2 0 0 1 ) . T h is c o u r t h a s d e v e lo p e d ath r e e - p a r t te s t to d e te rm in e w h e n as e ttle m e n t a g r e e m e n t c o n f e r s p r e v a ilin g p a r ty s ta tu s o n ap a r ty . S a i ntJ ohn’ s O r ga ni c F a rm v. G e m C nty . M os qui t o A ba t e m e ntD i s t . , 574 F . 3d 10 54 , 10 59 (9th C i r. 20 09 ). W e c on si der “ (1) j ud i ci al enforce m ent ; (2) m at er i al a l t e r a t i on of

the l e ga l r e l a t i ons hi p be tw e e n the pa r t i e s ; a nd ( 3) a c tua l r e l i e f on the m e r i t s of [ the pa rty ’ s ] c l a i m . ” I d. F i r s t , the r e i s no doubttha tthe s e tt l e m e nta gr e e m e ntbe tw e e n K a s s i ra nd thegove rnm e nti s j udi c i a l l y e nf or c e abl e be c aus e the di s tr i c tc our tappr ove d of a nd r e t a i ne d j ur i s di c t i on ove rthe s e tt l e m e nt . S e e i d. S e c o n d , w e f

in d th a t th e s e ttle m e n t a g r e e m e n t p r o d u c e d am a te r ia l c h a n g e in the r e l a t i ons hi p be tw e e n the pa rt i e s . K a s s i r ’ s obl i ga t i on t o pa y apor t i on of the s t or a ge c os t s a nd e xportthe m e r c ha ndi s e doe s notdi m i ni s h the f a c ttha tthe s e tt l e m e nta gr e e m e nta l l ow e d K a s s i rt o r e qui r e the gove rnm e ntt o r e l e a s e the p r o p e rty . S e e J a n k e y v . P o o p De c k , 5 3 7 F . 3 d 1 1 2 2 , 1 1 3 0 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 8 ) ( “ [ A] s e ttle m e n t a g r e e m e n t m e a n in g f u lly a lte r s th e le g a l r e la tio n s h ip b e tw e e n p a r tie s if it a l l ow s one pa rty t o r e qui r e the othe rpa r ty t o do s om e thi ng i tothe rw i s e w oul d not be re qu i re d t o d o. ”) (i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). T hi rd, K as si r r ec ei ved actual re l i ef thatvi nd i ca t ed atl ea ston e of i t s pri m ary g o a ls in p u r s u in g th is litig a tio n . T h is c o u r t r e c e n tly e x p la in e d th a t “[ t]h e th r e s h o ld fo r s u ff icien t relief to co n fe r p re v aili n g p ar ty statu s is n o t h ig h .” S ain t Jo h n ’s O r ga ni c F a rm , 574 F . 3d a t1059. A pa r ty ne e d onl y s uc c e e d on as i gni f i c a nti s s ue i n the l i t i ga t i on w hi c h r e s ul t e d i n abe ne f i tthe pa r ty s oughti n pur s ui ng the l i t i ga t i on. T e x. S t a t e T e a c he r s A s s ’ n v. G a r l a nd I nde p. S c hool D i s t . , 489 U . S . 782, 7 9 1 - 9 2 ( 1 9 8 9 ) . A lth o u g h K a s s ird id n o t a c h ie v e th e p r e c is e r e lie f it s o u g h t, K a s s ir a c h i e v e d s o m e r e l i e f

o n th e m e r i t s b e c au s e i twa s ab l e t o r e c o v e rth e p r o p e r ty . At i t s c or e , thi s l i t i ga t i on w a s aboutthe gove rnm e ntke e pi ng a nd de s tr oy i ng the a l l e ge d drug pa r aphe rna l i aa nd on tha ti s s ue K a s s i rpr e va i l e d.RE V E RS E D.P age 1 of 2

U ni t e d S t a t e s of

A m e r i c av. K a s s i rC o. , N o. 11- 56118 M U R G U I A , C i r c ui tJ udge , di s s e nt i ng: I di s a gr e e w i th the s t a nda r d of r e vi e w appl i e d by the m a j or i ty . W hi l e the C o u rt r e v ie w s p u r e ly le g a l q u e s tio n s d e n o v o , V . S. ex r e l . A . O . v . L os G a to s-Sa ra to g a Jo i n t

U n i o n Hi g h Sch . D ist . , 48 4 F . 3d 12 30 , 12 32 –3 3 (9th C i r. 2007) , “ w he the rthe pa rty ha s s ubs t a nt i a l l ypr e va i l e d [ ] i s af a c tua l de t e rm i na t i on for the di stri ctcourtt o res ol ve, ” Chu rc h o f Sci entol og

y of C al . v. U

. S. P ostalServ . , 7 0 0 F .2 d 4 8 6 , 4 8 9 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 3 ) ; se e al so Idah o C on se rv at i on L eagu e, Inc. , v. R u s s e ll , 94 6 F . 2d 71 7, 71 9 (9th C i r. 19 91 ) ( In C l ean W at erA ctcont ext , “ [w ] hether apa rty ha s pr e va i l e d ors ubs t a nt i a l l y pr e va i l e d i s af a c tua l que s t i on r e vi e w e d f or c le a re rr o r .” ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s c o n c lu s io n th a t K a s s irw a s n o t ap r e v a ilin g p a rty w a s n o t c le a r ly e rr o n e o u s . E v e n if d e n o v o r e v ie w w a s ap p r o p r ia te , I w o u ld s till a f f irm b e c au s e K a s s ir i s nota pre vai l i ng party. W hi l e the “ thres ho l d for suff i ci entre l i ef

t o con fe r pr e va i l i ng pa rty s t a tus i s nothi gh, ” K a s s i rs t i l l m us ts how tha ti t“ s uc c e e de d on any s i gn i fi canti ss ue i n l i t i gat i on w hi ch ac hi eved som e of the benefi tthe part i es soug hti n b ri ng i ng sui t . ” Sa in t J o h n 's O r g a n ic Fa rm v . G e m Cn ty . Mo s q u ito A b a te m e n t D is t. , 574 F . 3d 1054, 1059 ( 9th C i r . 2009) . P r i ort o thi s l i t i ga t i on, K a s s irh a d c le a n title to th e m e r c h a n d is e a n d s o u g h t to s e ll it in th e U n ite d S ta te s . 

# FI LED JU N 05 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSP age 2 of 2

T he U ni t ed S t at es i ni t i at ed thi s f orfe i ture a ct i on t o d es troy the m er chandi se , w hi ch i tal l eg es i s d ru g p arap h ern al i a. T h e p art i es sett l ed an d K assi r ag reed t o rel i n q u i sh aport i on of

i t s pr e vi ous l y une nc um be r e d pr ope r ty r i ght s i n the m e r c ha ndi s e a nd ex p o rtth e m erch an d i se t o a n o n co n t i g u o u s co u n try. I w o u ld h o ld th a t th e s e ttle m e n t is av ic to ry f o rth e U n ite dS ta te s , a s it obt a i ne d a n a gr e e m e ntf r om K a s s i rt o e xpor tthe m e r c ha ndi s e , thus a c hi e vi ng a g o a l th a t it s o u g h t— k e e p in g a lle g e d d ru g p a r ap h e rn a liao u t o f th e c o u n try . See Jankey v . P oo

p D ec k , 53 7 F . 3d 11 22 , 11 30 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( ho l di ng thata pl ai nt i ff w h o su ed a n i g h tcl u b fo r v i o l at i o n o f th e A m eri can s w i th D i sab i l i t i es A ctw as a pr e va i l i ng pa rty e ve n though he di s m i s s e d the s ui ta nd s e tt l e d a f t e rthe ni ghtc l ub agre ed t o b ui l d an acce ss i bl e r es troom i n an adj ac entre st aura nt ). T hatthe U ni t ed S t at es soug htthe m ore dras t i c r em edy of f orfe i ture, bu tul t i m at el y obt ai ned a l es se r r e m e d y d o e s n o t m e a n th e U n ite d S ta te s f a ile d to p r e v a il. I

d. ; Sa in t J

o h n 's O rg a n i c Fa rm , 574 F . 3d a t1059. K a s s i rc uti t s l os s e s by s e tt l i ng, buti tdi d not tran sfo rm th o se l o sses i n t o v i ct o ri es. A c c o r d in g ly , I r e s p e c tf

u lly d is s e n t.