United States of America v. One (1) 2008 Toyota Tundra
Filing
41
JOINT STATUS REPORT; ORDER. The case is stayed, with the exception of the pending motion for interlocutory sale, until February 21, 2014, by which time the parties shall file a further status report. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 22, 2013. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/22/2013)
MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)
1 United States Attorney
2 J. DOUGLAS WILSON (DCBN 412811)
Chief, Criminal Division
3
ARVON J. PERTEET (CABN 242828)
4 Assistant United States Attorney
5
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055
San Francisco, California 94102-3495
Telephone: (415) 436-6598
FAX: (415) 436-7234
ARVON.PERTEET@USDOJ.GOV
6
7
8 Attorneys for United States of America
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
12
13
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Plaintiff,
v.
ONE(1) 2008 TOYOTA TUNDRA, (VIN #
5TFDV58108X050994), ET AL.,
Defendants.
) CASE NO. CV 12-1439 MMC
)
) JOINT STATUS REPORT;
)
) [Proposed] ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff, the United States of America, by and through MELINDA HAAG, United States
Attorney, and ARVON J. PERTEET, Assistant United States Attorney, and Claimant
21
MATTHEW GRAVES by and through his attorney DAVID M. MICHAEL, ESQ., hereby
22
23
24
submit the following Joint Status Report.
On March 12, 2012, the Government filed this civil forfeiture action against the defendant
25 properties. The basis alleged for this forfeiture action is that the defendant properties were used to
26 facilitate the manufacture, possession, cultivation, and distribution and the possession with the intent to
27
distribute marijuana. On or about December 18, 2012, the Government brought a criminal action against
28
JOINT STATUS REPORT
CV 12-1439 MMC
30
1
claimant/defendant, MATTHEW GRAVES, in the matter of United States v. Matthew David Graves,
2 CR 12-0885 WHA, alleging possession with the intent to distribute marijuana. The criminal case also
3 alleges criminal forfeiture of the same property at issue in this civil forfeiture matter. On February 8,
4 2013, the Government filed a notice of related case in both case Nos. CV 12-01439 MMC, and CR 125 0885 WHA. The matter of United States v. Matthew David Graves, CR 12-0885 WHA, is currently set
6
for trial on September 9, 2013.
7
The civil forfeiture matter before this Court is currently stayed pending the resolution of the
8
9
criminal matter. However, the Government and claimant Umpqua Bank have filed a Motion for
10 Interlocutory Sale related to one of the defendant real properties. The motion was originally set to be
11 heard on September 13, 2013, before this Court. Docket Text 8/13/2013. Due to the unavailability of
12 counsel for claimant Graves, the parties have requested that this Court continue that hearing to October
13
14
11, 2013, with a modification of the briefing schedule. Doc 38, filed 8/14/2013 (Stipulation to Continue
Hearing/[Proposed] Order). With the exception of the Motion for Interlocutory Sale, the parties request
15
16
that the case be stayed for an additional six months pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1) and (2).
17
18
Dated: August 14, 2013
MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney
19
20
S/ARVON J. PERTEET__
ARVON J. PERTEET
Assistant United States Attorney
21
22
23
Dated: August 14, 2013
S/DAVID M. MICHAEL___
DAVID M. MICHAEL
Attorney for Claimant
MATTHEW D. GRAVES
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATUS REPORT
CV 12-1439 MMC
30
[Proposed] ORDER
1
2
3
Pursuant to the Joint Status Report, and with the exception of the pending hearing on Plaintiff’s
21
Motion for Interlocutory Sale, this case is further stayed until February ______ 2014, at which time the
4
5
parties shall file with the Court a further Status Report, or until such earlier time as further ordered by
6 this Court or requested by the parties.
7
8
9
Dated: August 22, 2013
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATUS REPORT
CV 12-1439 MMC
30
_________________________
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?