United States of America v. Approximately $419,930.00 in U.S. Currency

Filing 13

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/21/17 Recommending that Han He Chen, Best City Steel and East Park Trading Inc. be held in default; That the United States' MOTION for default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture 11 be granted; That judgment by default be entered against any right, title, or interest of potential claimants Han He Chen, Best City Steel and East Park Trading Inc. in the defendant currency referenced in the above cap tion. That a final judgment be entered, forfeiting all right, title, and interest in the defendant currency to the United States, to be disposed o according to law; The Clerk of Court be directed to close this case. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb. Objections to these F&Rs due within fourteen (14) days.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

4

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN
Assistant U. S. Attorney
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: [phone]

5

Attorneys for the United States

1
2
3

6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

2:17-CV-00635-WBS-KJN
FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

v.
APPROXIMATELY $419,930.00 IN U.S.
CURRENCY,

15
Defendant.
16
17

This matter came before the Honorable Judge Kendall J. Newman on the United States’ ex parte

18 motion for default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture, filed on May 16, 2017. (ECF No. 11.)
19 That same day, the court issued a minute order requiring any opposition to the motion to be filed no
20 later than June 16, 2017. (ECF No. 12.) Although that deadline has now passed, no opposition was
21 filed. There was also no appearance by or on behalf of any other person or entity claiming an interest
22 in the above-captioned defendant currency. Based on the United States’ motion and the files and
23 records of the court, THE COURT FINDS as follows:
24

1.

This action arose out of a Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem filed March 27,

2.

The United States has moved this Court, pursuant to Local Rule 540, for entry of default

25 2017.
26

27 judgment of forfeiture against potential claimants Han He Chen, Best City Steel and East Park Trading
28 Inc.
1

Findings and Recommendations

1

3.

The United States has shown that a complaint for forfeiture was filed; that potential

2 claimants Han He Chen, Best City Steel and East Park Trading Inc. received notice of the forfeiture
3 action; that any and all other unknown potential claimants have been served by publication; and that
4 grounds exist for entry of a final judgment of forfeiture.
5

Therefore, IT IS RECOMMENDED as follows:

6

1.

That Han He Chen, Best City Steel and East Park Trading Inc. be held in default;

7

2.

That the United States’ motion for default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture

8 (ECF No. 11) be granted;
9

3.

That judgment by default be entered against any right, title, or interest of potential

10 claimants Han He Chen, Best City Steel and East Park Trading Inc. in the defendant currency
11 referenced in the above caption;
12

4.

That a final judgment be entered, forfeiting all right, title, and interest in the defendant

13 currency to the United States, to be disposed of according to law;
14

5.

The Clerk of Court be directed to close this case.

15

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned

16 to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days after being
17 served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court
18 and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate
19 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served on all parties and
20 filed with the court within fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised
21 that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s
22 order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57
23 (9th Cir. 1991).
24 Dated: June 21, 2017
25
26
27
28
2

Findings and Recommendations