United States of America v. $707,291.00 in U.S. Currency
Filing
30
CONSENT JUDGMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES that $697,291.00 of the defendant currency (Asset ID No. 14-DEA-601288) and all interest earned on the entirety of the defendant currency since seizure, is hereby forfeited to the United States, and no other right, title or interest shall exist therein. The remaining portion of the defendant currency, $10,000.00 in U.S. currency, without any interest, shall be returned to Tashyan through his counsel. The funds are to be made payable via ACH deposit to Tashyan's attorney George G. Mgdesyan. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
EILEEN M. DECKER
United States Attorney
LAWRENCE S. MIDDLETON
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
STEVEN R. WELK
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Asset Forfeiture
YASIN MOHAMMAD
Assistant United States Attorney
Asset Forfeiture Section
California Bar No. 242798
United States Courthouse
312 North Spring Street, 14th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-6968
Facsimile: (213) 894-7177
E-Mail: Yasin.Mohammad@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
JS-6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
14
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
WESTERN DIVISION
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
) No.: CV 15-03179-ODW(PLAx)
)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
) [PROPOSED]
Plaintiff,
)
) CONSENT JUDGMENT
v.
)
)
$707,291.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_______________________________ )
)
)
HAKOP TASHYAN,
)
)
Claimant.
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
The civil forfeiture action captioned above was commenced
on April 29, 2015.
The defendant currency was seized from Hakop
Tashyan (“Tashyan”), and he was the only person to submit a
claim and answer.
Claimant Tashyan filed a claim on July 2,
2015 (ECF No. 17), and an answer on July 7, 2015 (ECF No. 19).
1
The time for filing claims and answers has expired and no person
2
other than Tashyan is believed to have a claim to the defendant
3
asset, $707,291.00 in U.S. Currency (“defendant currency”).
Plaintiff and Tashyan have made a stipulated request for
4
5
the entry of this consent judgment of forfeiture resolving all
6
claims concerning the defendant currency (Asset ID No. 14-DEA-
7
601288).
The Court has been duly advised of and has considered the
8
9
matter.
Based upon the mutual consent of the parties hereto and
10
good cause appearing therefor, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES
11
AND DECREES that $697,291.00 of the defendant currency (Asset ID
12
No. 14-DEA-601288) and all interest earned on the entirety of
13
the defendant currency since seizure, is hereby forfeited to the
14
United States, and no other right, title or interest shall exist
15
therein.
16
$10,000.00 in U.S. currency, without any interest, shall be
17
returned to Tashyan through his counsel.
18
made payable via ACH deposit to Tashyan’s attorney George G.
19
Mgdesyan.
20
///
The remaining portion of the defendant currency,
21
22
///
23
24
///
25
26
///
27
28
///
2
The funds are to be
1
The Court finds that there was reasonable cause for the
2
seizure of the defendant asset and the institution of this
3
action.
4
certificate of reasonable cause pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465.
5
Each of the parties shall bear its own fees and costs in
6
connection with the seizure, retention and return of the
zure, retention
et
f
7
defendant asset.
8
DATED:
This consent judgment shall be construed as a
February 22
, 2016
016
THE HONORABLE OTIS D. WRIGHT
HONORABLE OTIS
BL
BL
T
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
D
DISTRICT
9
10
11
12
13
Presented by:
14
15
16
17
18
19
EILEEN M. DECKER
United States Attorney
LAWRENCE S. MIDDLETON
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
STEVEN R. WELK
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Asset Forfeiture Section
20
21
22
/s/ Yasin Mohammad
YASIN MOHAMMAD
Assistant United States Attorney
23
24
Attorney for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
25
26
27
28
3
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?