United States of America v. Articles of drug as described in Attachment A

Filing 14

ORDER by Judge Ronald S.W. Lew, the Court NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS: Plaintiff Motion for Default Judgment Against Defendant Articles 12 is GRANTED. The Court hereby issues a Decree of Condemnation, Forfeiture, and Destruction against Defendant Articles. (See attached Order for further information). (jp)

United States of America v. Articles of drug as described in Attachment A

Doc. 14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 United States of America, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) O

CV 10-4632 RSWL (PLAx) ORDER Re: Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment [12]

15 Articles of drug as described in Attachment A 16 of the Complaint, 17 18 19 20 21 22 Defendants.

Plaintiff United States of America filed its Motion

23 for Default Judgment against Defendant Articles of drug 24 as described in Attachment A of the Complaint 25 ("Defendant Articles") on October 06, 2010 [12]. The 26 matter was originally set for hearing on November 09, 27 2010. Having taken the matter under submission on
1

28 November 05, 2010, and having reviewed all papers

Dockets.Justia.com

1 submitted pertaining to this Motion, the Court NOW 2 FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS: 3 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment Against 4 Defendant Articles is GRANTED. The Court hereby issues 5 a Decree of Condemnation, Forfeiture, and Destruction 6 against Defendant Articles. 7 The Court finds that the Government seized 8 Defendant Articles on July 22, 2010, pursuant to a 9 warrant issued by this Court. The Court further finds 10 that no person having interest in Defendant Articles 11 has appeared as claimant to file a responsive pleading 12 or otherwise defend in this Action within the time 13 permitted by law. On October 05, 2010, the Court Clerk 14 entered default against Defendant Articles of drug and 15 all persons and entities having any right, title, or 16 interest in the Defendant Articles, including Keystone 17 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. [11]. 18 With regard to entry of default judgment pursuant Furthermore, based on a balancing of the 19 to Local Rule 55, Plaintiff has met all procedural 20 requirements. 21 Eitel v. McCool factors, Plaintiff has met the 22 substantive requirements. 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th 23 Cir. 1986). Therefore, because Plaintiff has met all 24 procedural and substantive requirements, Plaintiff's 25 Motion for Default Judgment is GRANTED. 26 As to the Decree of Condemnation, Forfeiture, and 27 Destruction, the Court finds that Defendant Articles 28 are adulterated or misbranded pursuant to 21 U.S.C.
2

1 334(a)(1), and thus, may be destroyed pursuant to 21 2 U.S.C. 334(d)(1). Accordingly, this Court hereby issues 3 a Decree of Condemnation, Forfeiture, and Destruction 4 against Defendant Articles of drug as described in 5 Attachment A of the Complaint. 6 7 DATED: November 16, 2010 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
3

HONORABLE RONALD S.W. LEW Senior, U.S. District Court Judge