United States of America v. $147,862.00 in U.S. Currency

Filing 24

CONSENT JUDGMENT by Judge John F. Walter. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That $10,000.00 of the defendant currency shall be returned to Ruiz withoutinterest and shall be paid to Ruiz no later than sixty 60 days of the date this Judgment. United States of America shall have judgment as to the remaining $137,862 of the defendant currency, together with all interest earned by the government on the full amount of the defendant currency since seizure, and no other person or entity s hall have any right, title or interest therein. Ruiz agrees to waive any and all attorney fees and costs, and waives any rights he may have to petition for remission or mitigation of any portion of the forfeited funds. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 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 CHRISTEN A. SPROULE (Cal. Bar #310120) Assistant United States Attorney Asset Forfeiture Section 1400 United States Courthouse 312 North Spring Street Los Angeles, California 90012 Telephone: (213) 894-4493 Facsimile: (213) 894-7177 E-mail: Christen.A.Sproule@usdoj.gov JS-6 Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 WESTERN DIVISION 15 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 16 Plaintiff, 17 v. No. CV 16-05062-JFW (SSx) 18 $147,862.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, 19 CONSENT JUDGMENT Defendant. 20 21 JASON VILLAMAR RUIZ, Claimant. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This action was filed on March 29, 2016 against the defendant $147,862.00 in U.S. Currency (“defendant currency”). Jason Villamar Ruiz (“Ruiz”) filed a claim and answer on July 4, 2016. No person other than Ruiz is believed to have an interest therein. Notice has been given and published in accordance with law. No other claims or answers have been filed, and the time for filing claims and answers has expired. Plaintiff United States of America and Ruiz have reached an agreement that is 1 dispositive of the action and have requested that this consent judgment be entered. 2 Nothing in this consent judgment is intended or should be interpreted as an admission of 3 wrongdoing by Ruiz. 4 WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 5 A. 6 and 1355 and over the parties hereto. 7 8 This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1345 B. The Complaint for Forfeiture states a claim for relief pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). 9 C. Notice of this action has been given in accordance with law. All potential 10 claimants to the defendant currency other than Ruiz are deemed to have admitted the 11 allegations of the Complaint. The allegations set out in the Complaint are sufficient to 12 establish a basis for forfeiture. 13 D. $10,000.00 of the defendant currency shall be returned to Ruiz without 14 interest and shall be paid to Ruiz no later than sixty 60 days of the date this Judgment is 15 entered or the date Ruiz provides the information described below, whichever is later. If 16 the United States elects to make the payment by check, the check will be payable to 17 “David M. Dudley, Client Trust Account.” If the United States elects to make the 18 payment by wire transfer, the funds will be wire transferred to David M. Dudley, Client 19 Trust Account. Ruiz agrees to provide the necessary bank account information and 20 personal identifiers for Mr. Dudley’s trust account upon request from the United States. 21 E. The United States of America shall have judgment as to the remaining 22 $137,862 of the defendant currency, together with all interest earned by the government 23 on the full amount of the defendant currency since seizure, and no other person or entity 24 shall have any right, title or interest therein. 25 F. Ruiz agrees to waive any and all attorney fees and costs, and waives any 26 rights he may have to petition for remission or mitigation of any portion of the forfeited 27 funds. 28 2 1 G. Ruiz has released the United States of America, its agencies, agents, 2 officers, employees and representatives, including, without limitation, all agents, 3 officers, employees and representatives of the Drug Enforcement Administration and the 4 Department of Justice and their respective agencies, as well as all agents, officers, 5 employees and representatives of any state or local governmental or law enforcement 6 agency involved in the investigation or prosecution of this matter, from any and all 7 claims (including, without limitation, any petitions for remission, which Ruiz hereby 8 withdraws), actions or liabilities arising out of or related to this action, including, 9 without limitation, any claim for attorney fees, costs and interest, which may be asserted 10 by or on behalf of Ruiz, whether pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465 or otherwise. 11 /// /// /// 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 1 H. The Court finds that there was reasonable cause for the institution of these 2 proceedings. This Judgment shall be construed as a certificate of reasonable cause 3 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465. 4 5 Dated: October 18, 2016 6 7 _____________________________________ THE HONORABLE JOHN F. WALTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Approved as to form and content: 8 9 DATED: October 11, 2016 10 11 12 13 /s/ CHRISTEN A. SPROULE Assistant United States Attorney 14 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America 16 17 DATED: October 7, 2016 18 21 22 /s/ DAVID M. DUDLEY, ESQ. Attorney for Claimant JASON VILLAMAR RUIZ 19 20 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 DATED: October 4, 2016 /s/ JASON VILLAMAR RUIZ Claimant 23 24 25 26 27 28 4

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?