USA v. Real property located at 10027 Seattle Slew Lane, Elk Grove, California, Sacramento County, APN: 127-0940-009-0000
Filing
18
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/29/12 RECOMMENDING that Top Huynh, Tan Huynh, Dao Huynh, Kim Thi Huynh, and Henry K. Ho be held in default; that the United States' motion for default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture be granted; that a judgment by default be entered against any right, title, or interest of potential claimants Top Huynh, Tan Huynh, Dao Huynh, Kim Thi Huynh, and Henry K. Ho in the defendant property referenced in the above ca ption and more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto; that a final judgment be entered, forfeiting all right, title, and interest in the defendant property to the United States, to be disposed of according to law, subject to the Stipulation an d Order for Expedited Settlement Between United States and Lien Holder Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. filed 7/17/12, which is incorporated herein; that the Default Judgment and Final Judgment of Forfeiture lodged herein be signed by the Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller and filed by the Clerk of the Court. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due 14 days after this order is electronically filed and served on all parties. (Meuleman, A)
1
4
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN
Assistant U.S. Attorney
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916)554-2700
5
Attorneys for the United States
2
3
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
16
17
2:12-CV-00732-KJM-DAD
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
v.
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT
10027 SEATTLE SLEW LANE, ELK
GROVE CALIFORNIA,
SACRAMENTO COUNTY, APN:
127-0940-009-0000, INCLUDING
ALL APPURTENANCES AND
IMPROVEMENTS THERETO,
18
19
Defendant.
20
21
22
This matter came before the Honorable Judge Dale A. Drozd on the United
23
States’ ex parte motion for default judgment. There was no appearance by or on behalf
24
of any other person or entity claiming an interest in the above-captioned defendant
25
property to oppose the United States’ motion. Based on the United States’ motion and
26
the files and records of the court, THE COURT FINDS as follows:
27
28
1. This action arose out of a Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem filed
March 22, 2012.
1
Findings and Recommendations
1
2. The United States has moved this Court, pursuant to Local Rule 540, for
2
entry of default judgment of forfeiture against potential claimants Top Huynh, Tan
3
Huynh, Dao Huynh, Kim Thi Huynh, and Henry K. Ho.
4
3. The United States has shown that a complaint for forfeiture was filed; that
5
potential claimants Top Huynh, Tan Huynh, Dao Huynh, Kim Thi Huynh, and Henry
6
K. Ho received notice of the forfeiture action; that any and all other unknown potential
7
claimants have been served by publication; and that grounds exist for entry of a final
8
judgment of forfeiture.
9
10
11
12
13
Therefore, IT IS RECOMMENDED as follows:
4. That Top Huynh, Tan Huynh, Dao Huynh, Kim Thi Huynh, and Henry K. Ho
be held in default;
5. That the United States’ motion for default judgment and final judgment of
forfeiture be granted;
14
6. That a judgment by default be entered against any right, title, or interest of
15
potential claimants Top Huynh, Tan Huynh, Dao Huynh, Kim Thi Huynh, and Henry
16
K. Ho in the defendant property referenced in the above caption and more fully
17
described in Exhibit A attached hereto;
18
7. That a final judgment be entered, forfeiting all right, title, and interest in the
19
defendant property to the United States, to be disposed of according to law, subject to
20
the Stipulation and Order for Expedited Settlement Between United States and Lien
21
Holder Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. filed July 17, 2012, which is incorporated herein.
22
23
24
8. That the Default Judgment and Final Judgment of Forfeiture lodged herein
be signed by the Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller and filed by the Clerk of the Court.
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States
25
District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l).
26
Within fourteen (14) days after this order is electronically filed and served on all
27
parties, any party may file and serve written objections with the court. A document
28
containing objections should be titled “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and
2
Findings and Recommendations
1
Recommendations.” Any reply to objections shall be filed and served within seven (7)
2
days after the objections are served. The parties are cautioned that failure to file
3
objections within the specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right
4
to appeal the District Court's order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir.
5
1991).
6
DATED: July 29, 2012.
7
8
9
10
11
12
Ddad1\orders.civil
USvRealProperty0732.mdj.f&rs.wpd
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Findings and Recommendations
1
Exhibit A
(Real property located at 10027 Seattle Slew Lane, Elk Grove,
California, Sacramento County)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PARCEL ONE:
LOT 40, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF SUBDIVISION NO. 00.025.3 OF VAN RUITEN RANCH UNIT 2",
FILED NOVEMBER 10, 2003, IN BOOK 321 OF MAPS, MAP NO. 8, RECORDS OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY.
PARCEL TWO:
A RIGHT OF WAY (NOT TO BE EXCLUSIVE), FOR USE AS A ROADWAY FOR VEHICLES OF ALL KINDS,
PEDESTRIANS AND ANIMALS, FOR WATER, GAS, OIL AND SEWER PIPE LINES, AND FOR
TELEPHONE, CABLE, ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER LINES, TOGETHER WITH NECESSARY POLES
OR UNDERGROUND CONDUITS TO CARRY SAID LINES, OVER, UNDER AND UPON "SEABISCUIT
LANE, VAN RUITEN LANE, NATIVE DANCER LANE, SEATTLE SLEW LANE, SECRETARIAT LANE AND
KEAWE LANE", AS SHOWN ON SAID FILED MAP.
APN: 127-0940-009-0000
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Findings and Recommendations
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?