United States of America v. Real Property in London, United Kingdom, owned by Qentas Holdings

Filing 101

CONSENT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) See Consent Judgment for specifics. (jp)

JS-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

No. CV 16-5380-DSF (PLAx)

11
Plaintiff,
12
v.

13
14
15

REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN LONDON,
UNITED KINGDOM, OWNED BY QENTAS
HOLDINGS,

CONSENT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE
[This Consent Judgment is casedispositive]

Defendant.

16
17
18
19

I.

INTRODUCTION

20

1.

Plaintiff United States of America (“United States” or “the

21

government”) and Qentas Holdings Limited (the “Claimant”)

22

(collectively, the “Parties”), have made a stipulated request for the

23

entry of this Consent Judgment (the “Stipulation”), which is

24

dispositive of this action.

25

2.

Similar (and related) stipulations were filed by the

26

government and the Claimant or related entities in the following

27

actions (collectively the “Other Actions”):

28

1

1. United States v. Real Property Located in New York, New York,

2

No 16-cv-05371-DSF-PLA (C.D. Cal.). The claimant in this

3

action is Park Laurel Acquisition LLC;

4

2. United States v. Real Property Located in Beverly Hills,

5

California, No 16-cv-05377-DSF-PLA (C.D. Cal.). The claimant

6

in this action is 912 North Hillcrest Road (BH), LLC;

7

3. United States v. Real Property in London, United Kingdom,

8

owned by Qentas Holdings, No 16-cv-05380-DSF-PLA (C.D. Cal.).

9

The claimant in this action is Qentas Holdings Limited.

10

4. United States of America v. One Metropolis Poster, No 17-cv-

11

04440-DSF-PLA (C.D. Cal.). The claimants in this action are

12

Riza Shahriz Bin Abdul Aziz and Red Granite Pictures, Inc.

13

5. United States of America v. Up To $28,174,145.52 In

14

Huntington National Bank Escrow Account Number ’7196; et al.,

15

No. 19-cv-1327-DSF-PLA.

16

Granite Investment Holdings, LLC.

17

3.

The claimant in this action is Red

Nothing in the Stipulation or this Consent Judgment is

18

intended to be or constitutes an admission of fault, wrongdoing,

19

liability, or guilt on the part of the Claimant or its beneficial

20

owner, Riza Shahriz Bin Abdul Aziz, nor can this Consent Judgment or

21

the Parties’ underlying Stipulation be admissible against Mr. Aziz,

22

the Claimant, or any of the claimants in the Other Actions in any

23

proceeding as evidence of any of the allegations set out in the

24

operative complaints in this case or the Other Actions.

25

Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California and the

26

United States Department of Justice, Criminal Division, shall be

27

bound by the terms of this Consent Judgment and the doctrines of res

28

judicata and collateral estoppel.

The U.S.

The entry of this Consent Judgment

2

1

shall resolve all of the government’s civil, criminal, and

2

administrative asset forfeiture actions or proceedings relating to

3

the defendant Real Property Located in London, United Kingdom, Owned

4

by Qentas Holdings (the “Defendant Asset”) in this and the Other

5

Actions.

6

constitutes a waiver or release by the government of criminal claims,

7

except for the asset forfeiture claims related to the Defendant

8

Asset.

9
10

4.

Nothing in the Stipulation or this Consent Judgment

This action was commenced on July 20, 2016 against the

Defendant Asset.

11

II.

12

The Court, having considered the Stipulation of the Parties, and

13

FINDINGS

good cause appearing therefor, HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES:

14
15

Jurisdiction
5.

For purposes of this Consent Judgment, this Court has

16

jurisdiction over the Parties and this action.

17

notice of the action as required by Rule G of the Supplemental Rules

18

for Admiralty and Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions, and

19

the Local Rules of this Court.

20

Defendant Asset.

21

claims has expired.

22

claims of Claimant with respect to the Defendant Asset and is

23

dispositive of this action.

24

set out in the operative complaint are sufficient to establish a

25

basis for forfeiture of the Defendant Asset.

26

contained in the Stipulation or this Consent Judgment is intended or

27

should be interpreted as an admission of fault, guilt, liability

28

and/or any form of wrongdoing by Claimant.

The government gave

Claimant filed a timely claim for the

No other claims were filed, and the time for filing
Entry of this Consent Judgment will resolve all

If assumed to be true, the allegations

3

However, nothing

Notwithstanding any other

1

provision of the Stipulation or this Consent Judgment, the forfeiture

2

of the Defendant Asset does not constitute a fine, penalty, or

3

punitive damages.

4

other than Claimant, are deemed to have admitted the allegations of

5

the Complaint for purposes of this action only.

All potential claimants to the Defendant Asset,

Terms

6
7

6.

Upon entry of this Consent Judgment, all right, title and

8

interest of Claimant in the Defendant Asset shall be forfeited to the

9

United States, and no other right, title, or interest shall exist

10

therein, unless otherwise provided in this Consent Judgment,

11

provided, however, that (unless the parties agree otherwise in

12

writing) Claimant and the claimants in the Other Actions had the

13

right to withdraw from the Stipulation within 30 days of its filing

14

with the Court, by written notice filed on the docket in this and the

15

Other Cases.

16

prior to the expiration of that 30-day period, this Consent Judgment

17

shall not take effect until the date 30 calendar days from the filing

18

of the Stipulation.

19

to withdraw from the Stipulation, it shall be permitted to assert its

20

claims to the Defendant Asset and the defendant assets in the Other

21

Actions as if this Consent Judgment had never been entered, and as if

22

the Stipulation had never been entered in to.

23
24
25

7.

In the event that this Consent Judgment is entered

In the event that Claimant exercises its right

The government shall dispose of the Defendant Asset

according to law.
8.

It is the present intention of the Parties that the

26

Defendant Asset and the defendant assets in the Other Actions (or the

27

net proceeds of their disposition) shall, if appropriate and

28

authorized by law, be used for the benefit of the people of Malaysia

4

1

after deduction of the government’s associated costs, consistent with

2

the government’s prior practice in related cases.
Released Funds

3
4

9.

The government shall release the total sum of USD

5

$215,000.00, without interest (the “Released Funds”), as described

6

below.

7

10.

The Released Funds shall be paid to one or more account(s)

8

as directed by Boies Schiller Flexner, LLP (“Boies Schiller”), who

9

shall provide all information required to facilitate the payment,

10

including personal identification information required by federal law

11

or regulation, and complete all required documents.

12

the Released Funds shall be made to Boies Schiller no later than 60

13

days from the entry of this Consent Order.

14

be drawn from a portion of the funds held in the United States

15

Marshals Service’s Seized Asset Deposit Fund (“SADF”), arrested and

16

held by the United States in connection with the defendant asset in

17

United States of America v. Up To $28,174,145.52 In Huntington

18

National Bank Escrow Account Number ’7196; et al., No. 19-cv-1327-

19

DSF-PLA.

20

11.

The payment of

The Released Funds shall

The government shall not now nor in the future institute

21

any action against Boies Schiller, or seek the seizure, freezing,

22

return, forfeiture, or restraint of any kind of any of the Released

23

Funds, nor any interest earned on the Released Funds, for any acts or

24

omissions relating to the Released Funds preceding the date of its

25

receipt of the Released Funds.

26

///

27

///

28

5

Other Terms

1
2

12.

Claimant shall not contest or assist any other individual

3

or entity in contesting the forfeiture -- administrative, civil

4

judicial or criminal judicial -- of the Defendant Asset.

5

13.

Should any dispute arise about the interpretation of or

6

compliance with the terms of the Stipulation or this Consent

7

Judgment, the Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any such

8

disputes. However, should the Parties be unable to resolve a dispute,

9

either Party may move the Court to resolve the dispute and to impose

10

any remedy this Court deems necessary to enforce the terms of this

11

Consent Judgment.

12

14.

Each of the Parties shall bear its own fees and costs in

13

connection with the seizure, retention, and forfeiture of the

14

Defendant Asset.

15

15.

Nothing in the Stipulation or this Consent Judgment is

16

intended to or does abrogate or alter the terms of the March 2018

17

consent judgment entered in case numbers 16-cv-5352-DSF-PLA (C.D.

18

Cal.) and 17-cv-4439-DSF-PLA (C.D. Cal.).

19

doubt, and without limitation, the provisions of that consent

20

judgment under the headings “Release of Property,” “Surrender of

21

///

22

///

23
24
25
26
27
28

6

For the avoidance of

1

Rights,” “No Admission of Liability/No Tax Refund,” “Release of Civil

2

Claims,” “Hold Harmless,” “Third Parties Permitted to do Business”

3

and “Payments by Third Parties” shall remain in full force and

4

effect.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

October 6, 2020

7
Honorable Dale S. Fischer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12

Presented by:
DEBORAH CONNOR
Chief, MLARS

13
14
15
16
17

NICOLA T. HANNA
United States Attorney
/s/Jonathan Galatzan
JONATHAN GALATZAN
Assistant United States Attorney
WOO S. LEE
Deputy Chief, MLARS

18
19

Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

7