United States of America v. Approximately $1,000,000 in Funds Seized from Royal Credit Union Business 4 Year Certificate Account Number 4562463697 et al

Filing 14

ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: The Stipulation of Settlement is APPROVED 6 ; The United States' Motion for Default Judgment and Final Order of Forfeiture is GRANTED 11 ; and further directing. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion) Signed by The Hon. Paul A. Magnuson on 06/29/2017. (LLM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA United States of America, Civil No. 17-1366 (PAM/KMM) Plaintiff, ORDER v. Approximately $1,000,000 in Funds Seized From Royal Credit Union Business 4 Year Certificate of Deposit Account Number 4562463697; and Approximately $1,000,000 in Funds Seized From Royal Credit Union Business 4 Year Certificate of Deposit Account Number 4562463705, Defendants, and Complementary Care and Education Services, Inc., Claimant. This matter is before the Court on the United States’ Motion for Default Judgment and Final Order of Forfeiture. Based on that Motion and on all the files and records in this action, the Court finds: 1. The United States filed a Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem on April 25, 2017 (Docket No. 1), alleging that the Defendant Funds are subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1035; 2. The Clerk of Court issued a Warrant of Arrest and Notice In Rem on April 25, 2017, directing the U.S. Marshal to arrest the Defendant Funds and to serve all persons thought to have a potential interest in the Defendant Funds with a copy of the Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem, and the Warrant of Arrest and Notice In Rem; 3. The United States sent by certified mail the Notice of Judicial Forfeiture Proceedings, the Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem, and the Warrant of Arrest and Notice In Rem, to Thomas J. Shiah, counsel for Claimant Complementary Care and Education Services, Inc.; 4. Pursuant to Rule G(4)(a)(iv)(C), the U.S. Attorney’s Office posted a notice of forfeiture on an official government internet site (www.forfeiture.gov) for at least 30 consecutive days beginning on April 27, 2017; 5. Claimant Complementary Care and Education Services, Inc., filed a Claim for the Defendant Funds (Docket No. 5); 6. No other verified claim or answer has been filed, and the time for filing a claim and answer has expired under Rule G(5), Supplemental Rules For Admiralty Or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions; and 7. The United States and Claimant Complementary Care and Education Services, Inc. have stipulated to settle Claimant’s claim, providing that $250,000 of the Defendant Funds will be returned to Claimant and $1,750,000 plus any accumulated interest on the Defendant Funds will be forfeited to the United States (Docket No. 6). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Stipulation of Settlement (Docket No. 6) is APPROVED; 2. The United States’ Motion for Default Judgment and Final Order of Forfeiture (Docket No. 11) is GRANTED; 2 3. Default judgment is entered against all unknown persons and entities having an interest in the Defendant Funds for failure to file a verified statement of interest in or right against the Defendant Funds and an answer to the Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem as required by 18 U.S.C. § 983(a)(4)(A) and (B), and Rule G(5) of the Supplemental Rules For Admiralty Or Maritime Claims And Asset Forfeiture Actions; 4. The United States shall return $250,000 of the Defendant Funds to Complementary Care and Education Services, Inc. in accordance with the terms of the parties’ Stipulation; and 5. $1,750,000 of the Defendant Funds plus any accumulated interest on the Defendant Funds is forfeited to the United States pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) for disposition in accordance with law. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. s/ Paul A. Magnuson Dated: June 29, 2017 Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge 3

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?