United States v. Approximately $460,520.00 in U.S. Currency

Filing 13

ORDER Adopting 12 Findings and Recommendation In Part, ORDER for 9 Default Judgment Againt Potential Claimants Juan Plazola and Eduardo Maya-Perez and ORDER for SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/25/16. Fouteen-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

10
11
12
13
14

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-1878 AWI MJS

Plaintiff
v.
APPROXIMATELY $460,520.00 IN U.S.
CURRENCY,
Defendant

15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION IN PART,
ORDER FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
AGAINST POTENTIAL CLAIMANTS
JUAN PLAZOLA AND EDUARDO
MAYA-PEREZ, and ORDER FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING
(Doc. Nos. 9, 12)

16
17
18

On March 11, 2016, Plaintiff filed an ex parte motion for default judgment and final order

19

of forfeiture. See Doc. No. 9. On April 26, 2016, the magistrate judge assigned to this action

20

issued a Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”) recommending Plaintiff’s motion be granted

21

and that all right, title, and interest in the defendant funds be forfeited to the United States. See

22

Doc. No. 12. The F&R contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14)

23

days. To date, no party has filed objections.

24

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a

25

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the

26

F&R to be generally supported by the record and by proper analysis. As the F&R concluded, it is

27

appropriate to grant default judgment against any right, title, or interest that potential claimants

28

Juan Plazola and Eduardo Maya-Perez may have in the approximately $460,520.00.

1

However, the Court respectfully cannot grant a final order of forfeiture as to all potential

2

claimants at this time. Plaintiff’s motion shows that the funds at issue were found in an

3

automobile. Plazola was the driver and Maya-Perez was the passenger. Both denied knowledge

4

of any drugs, weapons, or cash in the vehicle. However, the vehicle appears to have been owned

5

by someone named “Marcia.” Police officers appear to have spoken to Marcia over the telephone.

6

Marcia confirmed that she loaned the vehicle to Plazola. Like Plazola and Maya-Perez, Marcia

7

denied that there were any drugs, weapons, or cash in the vehicle.

8

Local Rule 500(d) and Supplemental Rule G(4)(b) require direct notice be sent to any

9

person who reasonably appears to be a potential claimant. When an owner of an automobile is not

10

present, items recovered in the automobile may reasonably belong to the owner, the driver, or any

11

passenger. Since direct notice was attempted with respect to Plazola and Maya-Perez, it is not

12

clear why such notice was not attempted on Marcia, the purported owner.

13

Before a final forfeiture order as to all potential claimants is entered, the Court finds it

14

appropriate for Plaintiff to submit additional briefing concerning the owner of the vehicle. In light

15

of the attempts at direct notice with respect to Plazola and Maya-Perez, Plaintiff should explain

16

whether the ownership of the vehicle was known or could have been reasonably ascertained

17

through the California Department of Motor Vehicles, whether direct notice was attempted on

18

Marcia or the registered owner of the vehicle, or otherwise explain why direct notice on Marcia or

19

the registered owner was not needed. For now, the Court will partially grant Plaintiff’s motion

20

with respect to Plazola and Maya-Perez. Once the Court receives Plaintiff’s additional briefing,

21

the Court will rule on the remainder of Plaintiff’s motion.

22

ORDER

23

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

24

1.

The F&R (Doc. No. 12) is ADOPTED in part, as discussed above;

25

2.

Plaintiff’s ex parte motion for default judgment and final order of forfeiture (Doc. No. 9) is

26
27
28

GRANTED IN PART;
3.

Default judgment is GRANTED with respect to potential claimants Juan Plazola and
Eduardo Maya-Perez;
2

1

4.

2
3

All right, title, and interest in the Defendant funds (approximately $460,520.00) that may
be possessed by potential claimant Juan Plazola is FORFEITED to the United States;

5.

All right, title, and interest in the Defendant funds (approximately $460,520.00) that may

4

be possessed by potential claimant Eduardo Maya-Perez is FORFEITED to the United

5

States;

6

6.

Within fourteen (14) days of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file supplemental briefing

7

with respect to “Marcia” and the registered owner of the vehicle (if the registered owner

8

could be reasonably ascertained); and

9
10

7.

Following receipt of Plaintiff’s supplemental briefing, the Court will rule on the remainder
of Plaintiff’s motion.

11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 25, 2016
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3