United States of America v. CAPITOL ONE BANK CHECK, dated August 2, 2007, in the amount of $336.57 and made out to Valz Maldy, et al.

Filing 15

DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE in favor of Plaintiff United States of America and against Defendants Bank of America Bank Check, Capital One Bank Check, Intermountain Community Bank Check, Washington Mutual Bank Check, Wells Fargo Bank Check, Sam Amadeo Battani, and Adam Amadeo Battani. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 11/2/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

Case 2:10-cv-02165-KJD -PAL Document 14-1

1
2
3
4
5
6

Filed 11/01/11 Page 1 of 4

DANIEL G. BOGDEN
United States Attorney
Nevada Bar No. 2137
MICHAEL A. HUMPHREYS
Assistant United States Attorney
Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse
333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 5000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Counsel for the United States of America

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.
CAPITOL ONE BANK CHECK, $336.57 and
made out to Valz Maldy; et al.

14
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:10-CV-02165-KJD (PAL)

15
DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE

16
17
18
19

1. The United States filed a verified Complaint for Forfeiture in Rem on December 14, 2010.
Docket #1. The Complaint alleges the defendant property:
a.

constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to violations of 18 United

20

States Code, Section 1029, or a conspiracy to commit such offenses, are

21

subject to seizure pursuant to 18 United States Code, Section 981(b) and are

22

subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C);

23
24

b.

constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to violations of 18 United
States Code, Section 1344, or a conspiracy to commit such offenses, are
1

Case 2:10-cv-02165-KJD -PAL Document 14-1

Filed 11/01/11 Page 2 of 4

subject to seizure pursuant to 18 United States Code, Section 981(b) and are
1
subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 United States Code, Section 981(a)(l)(C);
2

c.

3

constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to violations of 18 United
States Code, Section 1341, a specified unlawful activity as defined in 18

4

United States Code, Sections 1956(c)(7)(A) and 1961(1)(B), or a conspiracy

5

to commit such offenses, are subject to seizure pursuant to 18 United States

6

Code, 19 Section 981(b), and are subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 United

7

States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C);

8

d.

constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to violations of 18 United

9

States Code, Section 1343, a specified unlawful activity as defined in 18

10

United States Code, Sections 1956(c)(7)(A) and 1961(1)(B), or a conspiracy

11

to commit such offenses, are subject to seizure pursuant to 18 United States

12

Code, 26 Section 981(b), and are subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 United

13

States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C);
e.

14

are involved in transactions or attempted transactions in violations of 18
United States Code, Section 1956, or are properties traceable to such

15

properties, are subject to seizure pursuant to 18 United States Code, Section

16

981(b), and are subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 United States Code,

17

Section 981(a)(l)(A); and
18
f.

are involved in transactions or attempted transactions in violations of 18

19
United States Code, Section 1957, or are properties traceable to such
20

properties, are subject to seizure pursuant to18 United States Code, Section

21

981(b), and are subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 United States Code,

22
23

Section 981(a)(1)(A).
...

24
2

Case 2:10-cv-02165-KJD -PAL Document 14-1

Filed 11/01/11 Page 3 of 4

1

It appearing that process was fully issued in this action and returned according to law;

2

On December 16, 2010, the Court entered an Order for Summons and Warrant of Arrest in

3

Rem for the Property and Notice and issued the Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem. #5, #6.

4

Pursuant to the Order (#5), the Complaint (#1), the Summons and Warrant (#6), and the

5

Notice of Complaint for Forfeiture (#5) were served on the defendant property, and the Notice was

6

published according to law. #7. All persons interested in the defendant property were required to

7

file their claims with the Clerk of the Court within 30 days of the publication of the Notice or within

8

35 days of actual notice of this action, as applicable, followed by the filing of an answer to the

9

Complaint within 21 days after the filing of their respective claims. #1, #5, #6, #7.

10

Public notice of the forfeiture action and arrest was given to all persons and entities by

11

publication on the official government website www.forfeiture.gov from January 23, 2011, through

12

to February 21, 2011. #7, p. 5-13.

13

On October 25, 2011, the United States entered a Notice of Forfeiture Agreement from

14

Criminal Case pursuant to a criminal action designated as United States of America v. Sam Amadeo

15

Battani and Adam Amadeo Battani, docketed as 2:10-CR-202-RLH (GWF) showing they agreed

16

to the forfeiture of the property in the criminal proceedings, and not requiring the United States to

17

serve either of them in any other related matter regarding the defendant properties. #9.

18

On February 23, 2011, the Notice of Filing Proof of Publication Process was filed. #7.

19

No other person or entity has filed a claim, answer, or responsive pleading within the time

20

permitted by 18 U.S.C.§ 983(a)(4) and Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Rule G(4) and (5).

21

On October 28, 2011, the United States filed a Request for Entry of Default against the

22

defendant property and all persons or entities who claim an interest in the defendant property in the

23

above-entitled action. #12.

24

On October 31, 2011, the Clerk of the Court entered a Default against the defendant

3

Case 2:10-cv-02165-KJD -PAL Document 14-1

Filed 11/01/11 Page 4 of 4

1

property and all persons or entities who claim an interest in the defendant property in the above-

2

entitled action. #13.

3
4

Defendants Sam Amadeo Battani and Adam Amadeo Battani are not in the military service
within the purview of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. Exhibits A and B of #9, #11.

5

The allegations of the Complaint are sustained by the evidence and are adopted as findings

6

of fact. The Court concludes as a matter of law that the United States is entitled to the relief

7

requested in the Complaint.

8

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that

9

Default Judgment of Forfeiture be entered against the defendant property and all persons or entities

10

who claim an interest in the defendant property in the above-entitled action.

11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that said property be, and the

12

same is hereby forfeited to the United States of America, and no right, title, or interest in the

13

property shall exist in any other party.

14
15

IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465(a)(2), that there was reasonable
cause for the seizure or arrest of the defendant property.
11/2/11
DATED:___________________________

16
17
18

___________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24

4