Opinion ID: 4017397
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The District Court’s Judgments

Text: Since its commencement in 2008, this forfeiture action has generated numerous decisions by the District Court. As relevant here, on September 9, 2013, the District Court denied Alavi’s and 650 Fifth Ave. Co.’s motion to suppress evidence seized during the December 2008 search, which they alleged violated their Fourth Amendment rights. See In re 650 Fifth Ave. Suppression Decision, 970 F. Supp. 2d 204.16 On September 16, 2013, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the United States, forfeiting all of Assa’s, Alavi’s, and 650 Fifth Ave. Co.’s interests in the Defendant Properties, with the exception of the Alavi Real Properties and three Alavi‐only bank accounts. In re 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties, No. 08 CIV. 10934(KBF), 2013 WL 5178677, at  (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2013) (“In re 650 Fifth Ave. Summary Judgment Decision”). In 15 The summary judgment entered in favor of these creditors is also before this panel and, although not consolidated with appeal of the forfeiture judgment, we heard oral argument on the two actions in tandem given their factual overlap. We dispose of the appeal in the judgment creditor action in a separate opinion also filed this day, see Kirschenbaum, 14‐1963. 16 Though they were parties below, Assa Corporation and Assa Limited did not join Alavi’s and 650 Fifth Ave. Co.’s motion to suppress, and we express no view as to whether they would have had standing to do so. 35 granting summary judgment, the District Court sua sponte raised and rejected the Claimants’ possible statute of limitations defense. Id. at –38. On April 18, 2014, the District Court granted summary judgment to the Government as to the Alavi Real Properties and three Alavi‐only bank accounts. In re 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties, No. 08 CIV. 10934(KBF), 2014 WL 1516328, at –31 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2014). Finally, on May 28, 2014, at Alavi’s and 650 Fifth Ave. Co.’s request, the District Court entered final judgment as to the Government’s claims of forfeiture against these Claimants’ properties. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (permitting entry of final judgment as to “fewer than all . . . claims or parties” upon finding of “no just reason for delay”); see Order, In re 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties, No. 08 Civ. 10934(KBF) (May 27, 2014), ECF No. 1151; Rule 54(b) Judgment, In re 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties (May 28, 2014), ECF No. 1152. 17 Alavi and 650 Fifth Ave. Co. timely appealed, challenging the final summary forfeiture judgment of their interests in the Defendant Properties, and the denial of their motion to suppress. 17 Although the District Court also awarded the Government summary judgment with respect to Assa’s interest in the Defendant Properties, Assa did not seek a Rule 54(b) final judgment and, thus, that portion of the District Court’s summary judgment order is not before us on this appeal. 36