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)
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?