United States of America v. 383,365.70 In Bank Funds et al
Filing
30
CONSENT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE by Judge George H. Wu in favor of United States of America against 34,860.00 In U.S. Currency, 383,365.70 In Bank Funds in the principal amount of $418,225.70, interest in the amount of $0.00, attorneys fees of $0.00, costs of $0.00 for a total judgment of $418,225.70. ( MD JS-6. Case Terminated ) (mrgo)
JS-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
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
KATHARINE SCHONBACHLER (CBN: 222875)
Assistant United States Attorney
Asset Forfeiture Section
1400 United States Courthouse
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-3172
Facsimile: (213) 894-7177
E-mail: Katie.Schonbachler@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
No. CV 15-7554-GW (GJSx)
CONSENT JUDGMENT OF
FORFEITURE
$383,365.70 IN BANK FUNDS AND
$34,860.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY,
Defendants.
23
24
25
HEE SUN SHIM AND IL SOON LEE,
Claimants.
26
27
28
This civil forfeiture action was commenced on September 25, 2015 against the
defendants $383,365.70 in bank funds and $34,860.00 in U.S. Currency. Hee Sun Shim
1
and Il Soon Lee (collectively referred to as “Claimants”) filed a claim of interest in the
2
defendants on November 6, 2015. Shim claimed an interest in all of the defendants and
3
Lee claimed an interest in all defendants except Lee did not claim $276,175.50 of the
4
defendant bank funds which were seized from Uniti Bank account ending in 2784.
5
No other parties have appeared in this case and the time for filing claims of
6
interest and answers has expired. Plaintiff United States of America and Claimants have
7
reached an agreement that is dispositive of the action. The parties hereby request that
8
the Court enter this Consent Judgment of Forfeiture.
WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
9
10
This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action.
11
Notice of this action has been given in accordance with law. All potential
12
claimants to the defendants, other than Claimants, are deemed to have admitted the
13
allegations of the Complaint. The allegations set out in the Complaint are sufficient to
14
establish a basis for forfeiture.
15
The United States of America shall have judgment as to $383,365.70 in bank
16
funds and $34,860.00 in U.S. currency and all interest earned on the entirety of the
17
defendants since seizure, and no other person or entity shall have any right, title or
18
interest therein. The United States is ordered to dispose of said funds in accordance with
19
law.
20
Claimants agree to release the United States of America, its agencies, agents, and
21
officers, including employees, officers and agents of the Department of Homeland
22
Security from any and all claims, actions or liabilities arising out of or related to this
23
action or the underlying seizures, including, without limitation, any claim for attorney’s
24
fees, costs or interest which may be asserted on behalf of Claimants, whether pursuant to
25
28 U.S.C. § 2465 or otherwise. If Claimants submitted petitions for remission to any of
26
the defendants in any proceedings, Claimants hereby stipulate to withdraw the petitions,
27
and waive any rights they may have to seek remission or mitigation of the forfeiture of
28
the defendants.
2
1
The Court finds that there was reasonable cause for the seizure of the defendants
2
and institution of these proceedings. This judgment shall be construed as a certificate of
3
reasonable cause pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465.
4
5
6
Dated: February 13, 2017
GEORGE H. WU, U.S. District Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
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?