Bloom v. United States Department of the Treasury
ORDER denying 1 Petitioner's Petition for Release of Property. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 1/28/13.(DMT)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
United States Department of Treasury, )
The court has before it petitioner’s petition for release of property pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 983(f)(5) (doc. 1), and the government’s objection (doc. 6). Petitioner seeks the
release of a 2004 Rolls Royce Phantom Sedan, VIN SCA1S68444UX07410 (“vehicle”),
which was seized by the government pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 5317(c)(2) and 18 U.S.C. § 981
and is now subject to forfeiture. The government contends that the vehicle was purchased
through financial transactions that were knowingly structured to avoid the reporting
requirements of 31 U.S.C. § 5313(a), in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a). Bloom now seeks
return of the vehicle, contending that its seizure has caused a financial hardship by
preventing him from operating his business.
In order to support his petition for return of property, Bloom must show that (1) he
has a possessory interest in the vehicle, (2) he has sufficient ties to the community so as to
provide assurance that the property will be available at the time of trial, (3) the government’s
continued possession of the property will cause a substantial hardship, and (4) the hardship
outweighs the risk that the property will become unavailable if it is returned to the claimant
while forfeiture proceedings are pending. 18 U.S.C. § 983(f)(1).
Bloom claims to be the sole shareholder of Luxury Coach Services, Inc. (“LCS”),
which he contends provides luxury vehicle and limousine service within the Phoenix metro
area. He asserts that the vehicle is the property of LCS and that the LCS business is his main
source of income. (Doc. 1).
The government challenges Bloom’s claim of financial hardship, arguing that Bloom
has presented no evidence that the vehicle ever generated any income. Although Bloom
claims that LCS is incorporated in Nevada and Arizona, the Nevada corporation’s license
expired on February 28, 2011, and the Arizona corporate status was revoked on October 28,
2011. In addition, LCS has never been licensed to operate a limousine service in Arizona,
and there is no record of any income generated by LCS. In fact there is no record of any
wages paid to Bloom in the last three years. Finally, Bloom’s driver’s license was revoked
following a DUI conviction, and although two other luxury vehicles are also purported to be
owned by LCS, Bloom has made no effort to place these vehicles in service in place of the
The government has called into question Bloom’s community ties, establishing that
he has significant connections with other states, including addresses, driver’s licenses, and
vehicles registered in Virginia and Delaware. The government also has demonstrated that
any claimed hardship is far outweighed by the risk that the vehicle will be unavailable if it
is returned to Bloom while the forfeiture proceedings are pending. The vehicle is highly
mobile and could be moved, sold, damaged or destroyed with little effort, making recovery
difficult, if not impossible. Bloom did not respond to the government’s objections.
We conclude that Bloom has failed to satisfy the requirements of 18 U.S.C. §
983(f)(1). Therefore, IT IS ORDERED DENYING Bloom’s petition for release of property
(doc. 1). The clerk shall enter final judgment.
DATED this 28th day of January, 2013.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?