United States of America v. Approximately $250,000.00 in U.S. Currency Seized from Bank of America Account Number 0009001010, Held in the Name of Samy M. Hauter et al

Filing 25

FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/26/2013. CASE CLOSED.(Fahrney, E)

1 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
2 HEATHER MARDEL JONES
Assistant United States Attorney
3
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401
4 Fresno, CA 93721
Telephone: [phone]
5 Facsimile: [phone]
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

CASE NO. 1:12-CV-00224-LJO-SAB
FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE

v.
APPROXIMATELY $250,000.00 IN U.S.
CURRENCY SEIZED FROM BANK OF
AMERICA ACCOUNT NUMBER
0009001010, HELD IN THE NAME OF
SAMY M. HAUTER,
APPROXIMATELY $121,821.00 IN U.S.
CURRENCY SEIZED FROM WELLS
FARGO ACCOUNT NUMBER 8303260072,
HELD IN THE NAME OF BOB M. HAUTER,
APPROXIMATELY $77,437.98 IN U.S.
CURRENCY SEIZED FROM CITIBANK
ACCOUNT NUMBER 40036583595, HELD
IN THE NAME OF BOB HAUTER, and
APPROXIMATELY $985.53 IN U.S.
CURRENCY SEIZED FROM WELLS
FARGO BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER
7268864399, HELD IN THE NAME OF
BOB M. HAUTER,

26

Defendants.

27
28
Final Judgment of Forfeiture

30

1

1 Pursuant to the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture, the Court finds:
2
3
4

1. This is a civil action involving approximately $250,000.00 seized from Bank of America account
number 00090001010 on September 14, 2011, approximately $121,821.00 seized from Wells
Fargo Bank account number 8303260072 on September 14, 2011, approximately $958.53 seized

5
6
7
8

from Wells Fargo Bank account number 7268864399 on September 14, 2011, and approximately
$77,437.98 seized from CitiBank account number 40036583595 on September 14, 2011
(collectively “defendant funds”).

9

2. The Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem ("Complaint") was filed on February 16, 2012,

10

alleging that said defendant funds are subject to forfeiture to the United States of America

11

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 984 and 31 U.S.C. § 5317(c)(2) incorporating the procedures governing

12
civil forfeitures in money laundering cases pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A), as property
13
14

involved in violations of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(1), which prohibits causing, or attempting to cause

15

a financial institution to fail to file Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) and 31 U.S.C. §

16

5324(a)(3), which prohibits the structuring or assisting in structuring, or attempting to structure

17

or assist in the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of 31 U.S.C. §§ 5313(a) or 5325to

18

21 U.S.C. §§ 881(a)(4) and 881 (a)(6).

19

3. On February 29, 2012, the Clerk issued a Warrant for Arrest for the defendant funds, which was

20
duly executed.
21
22

4. Beginning on February 23, 2012, and continuing for at least 30 consecutive days, the United

23

States published notice of this action on the official government forfeiture site

24

www.forfeiture.gov. A Declaration of Publication was filed with the Court.

25

5. In addition to the public notice on the official internet government forfeiture site

26
27

www.forfeiture.gov , direct notice or attempted direct notice was given to the following
individuals:

28
Final Judgment of Forfeiture

30

2

1

a.

Mohamed “Samy” Hauter

2

b.

Mohamed “Bob” Hauter

c.

Neal Costanzo, Esq.

3
4
5
6
7
8

6. On March 2, 2013, Mohamed “Samy” Hauter and Mohamed “Bob” Hauter, each filed a claim in
the instant forfeiture action; and on April 10, 2012, each filed an Answer. To date, no other
parties have filed claims or answers in this matter, and the time in which any person or entity
may file a claim and answer has expired.
Based on the above findings, and the files and records of the Court, it is hereby ORDERED

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

AND ADJUDGED:
1. The Court adopts the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture entered into by and between
the parties to this action, and incorporates it by reference herein.
2. That judgment is hereby entered against Claimant Mohamed “Samy” Hauter, Claimant
Mohamed “Bob” Hauter, and all other potential claimants who have not filed claims in this
action.

16
3. Upon entry of the Final Judgment of Forfeiture herein $ 87,500.00, together with any interest
17
18

which may have accrued on the full amount of the defendant funds, shall be forfeited to the

19

United States pursuant to pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 984, 981, and 31 U.S.C. § 5317(c)(2), to be

20

disposed of according to law.

21
22
23

4. Within 45 days of entry of the Final Judgment of Forfeiture herein, $ 362,744.51 of the
defendant funds shall be returned to Claimants Mohamed “Samy” Hauter and Mohamed “Bob
Hauter, via Claimants’ counsel: Neal E. Costanzo, Costanzo & Associates, 575 E. Locust

24
Avenue, Suite 115, Fresno, CA 93720 [phone].
25
26

5. That the United States of America and its servants, agents, and employees and all other public

27

entities, their servants, agents, and employees, are released from any and all liability arising out

28

of or in any way connected with the seizure, arrest, or forfeiture of the defendant funds. This is
Final Judgment of Forfeiture

30

3

1

a full and final release applying to all unknown and unanticipated injuries, and/or damages

2

arising out of said seizure, arrest, or forfeiture, as well as to those now known or disclosed. The

3
4

parties to this agreement agree to waive the provisions of California Civil Code § 1542.
6. That pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and the allegations set forth in the Complaint filed

5
6
7

on February 16, 2012, the Court finds that no party substantially prevailed within the meaning of
28 U.S.C. § 2465, that there was probable cause for arrest and seizure of the defendant funds,

8

and for the commencement and prosecution of this forfeiture action, and a Certificate of

9

Reasonable Cause pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465 shall be entered accordingly.

10
11
12

7. All parties are to bear their own costs and attorney’s fees.
8. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California shall retain jurisdiction to enforce
the terms of the parties’ Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture, and this Final Judgment of

13
14
15

Forfeiture.
The clerk is directed to close this case.

16
17 IT IS SO ORDERED.
18

Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

November 26, 2013

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Final Judgment of Forfeiture

30

4