USA v. Approximately $133,803.53 in U.S. Currency seized from Washington Mutual Bank et al

Filing 47

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/20/10 RECOMMENDING that Lawrence Leland Loomis be held in default; Plaintiff's motion for default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture be granted; a judgment b y default be entered against any right, title or interest of Lawrence Leland Loomis in the dft funds; that a final judgment be entered, forfeiting all right, title and interest in the defendant funds to the United States of America, to be disposed of according to law; and that the Default Judgment and Final Judgment of Forfeiture lodged herein be signed by the district judge and filed by the Clerk of the Court. Referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr (Becknal, R)

United States of America v. Approximately $133,803.53 in U.S. Curr...shington Mutual Bank et al

Doc. 47

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney SARALYN M. ANG-OLSON, SBN 197404 Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) APPROXIMATELY $133,803.53 IN U.S. ) CURRENCY SEIZED FROM WASHINGTON ) MUTUAL BANK, N.A., ACCOUNT ) #4420842802, HELD IN THE NAME OF ) ADVANTAGE FINANCIAL GROUP HOLDINGS ) MANAGEMENT LLC, and ) ) APPROXIMATELY $328,495.75 IN U.S. ) CURRENCY SEIZED FROM WASHINGTON ) MUTUAL BANK, N.A., ACCOUNT ) #4412174338, HELD IN THE NAME OF ) LOOMIS WEALTH SOLUTIONS LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) )

2:09-CV-00461-FCD-KJM FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This matter came before the Honorable Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on plaintiff United States' ex parte motion for default judgment. There was no appearance by or on behalf of any other

person or entity claiming an interest in the above-captioned defendant funds to oppose plaintiff's motion. Based on plaintiff's

motion and the files and records of the court, THE COURT FINDS as follows:

1
Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1.

This action arose out of a Verified Complaint for

Forfeiture In Rem filed February 17, 2009. 2. Plaintiff United States of America has moved this Court,

pursuant to Local Rule 540, for entry of default judgment of forfeiture against Lawrence Leland Loomis. 3. Plaintiff has shown that a complaint for forfeiture was

filed; that potential claimant Lawrence Leland Loomis received notice of the forfeiture action; that any and all other unknown potential claimants have been served by publication;1 and that

grounds exist for entry of a final judgment of forfeiture. Therefore, IT IS RECOMMENDED as follows: 4. 5. That Lawrence Leland Loomis be held in default; That plaintiff's motion for default judgment and final

judgment of forfeiture be granted; 6. That a judgment by default be entered against any right,

title or interest of Lawrence Leland Loomis in the defendant funds; 7. That a final judgment be entered, forfeiting all right,

title and interest in the defendant funds to the United States of America, to be disposed of according to law. 8. That the Default Judgment and Final Judgment of Forfeiture

lodged herein be signed by the district judge and filed by the Clerk of the Court. Dated: July 20, 2010.

The answer of claimant Flagstaff Bank was stricken by order of the court filed February 10,2010. Although an appeal of that order was filed on February 18, 2010, the order is a nonappealable interlocutory order, and as such, does not divest this court of jurisdiction to enter default judgment. See Nascimento v. Dummer, 508 F.3d 905, 908 (9th Cir. 2007); 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a). 2

1