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)

Download PDF
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?