United States of America v. Approximately $48,091.56 in U.S. Currency, No. 2:2013cv01694 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/4/2014. CASE CLOSED. (Zignago, K.) Modified on 6/5/2014 (Zignago, K.).

Download PDF
United States of America v. Approximately $48,091.56 in U.S. Currency Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. 2:13-CV-01694-KJM-CKD FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE APPROXIMATELY $48,091.56 IN U.S. CURRENCY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Pursuant to the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture, the court finds: 18 1. This is a civil action in rem brought Approximately $48,091.56 in U.S. 19 Currency (“defendant currency”), which was seized on or about March 5, 2013. 20 2. A Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem (“Complaint”) was filed on 21 August 15, 2013, alleging that said defendant currency is subject to forfeiture to the 22 United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). 23 3. On August 22, 2013, the Clerk issued a Warrant for Arrest for the defendant 24 currency, and that warrant was duly executed on August 26, 2013. 25 4. Beginning on August 21, 2013, for at least 30 consecutive days, the United 26 States published Notice of the Forfeiture Action on the official internet government 27 forfeiture site www.forfeiture.gov. A Declaration of Publication was filed on September 28 23, 2013. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 5. In addition to the public notice on the official internet government forfeiture 2 site www.forfeiture.gov, actual notice or attempted notice was given to the following 3 individual(s): James Keith McCollum. 4 6. Claimant James Keith McCollum filed an answer alleging an interest in the 5 defendant currency on December 17, 2013. No other parties have filed claims or answers 6 in this matter, and the time in which any person or entity may file a claim and answer 7 has expired. 8 Based on the above findings, and the files and records of the court, it is hereby 9 ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 10 7. The court adopts the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture entered 11 into by and between the parties to this action insofar as consistent with this order. 12 8. Judgment is hereby entered against claimant James Keith McCollum and all 13 other potential claimants who have not filed claims in this action. 14 9. All right, title, and interest of James Keith McCollum in the Approximately 15 $48,091.56 in U.S. Currency, together with any interest that may have accrued, shall be 16 forfeited to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6), to be disposed of 17 according to law. 18 10. That the United States and its servants, agents, and employees and all other 19 public entities, their servants, agents, and employees, are released from any and all 20 liability arising out of or in any way connected with the seizure, arrest, or forfeiture of the 21 defendant currency. This is a full and final release applying to all unknown and 22 unanticipated injuries, and/or damages arising out of said seizure, arrest, or forfeiture, as 23 well as to those now known or disclosed. James Keith McCollum waives the provisions of 24 California Civil Code § 1542. 25 11. Claimant James Keith McCollum waives any and all claim or right to 26 interest that may have accrued on the defendant currency. 27 12. All parties are to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees. 28 2 1 13. The court, in its discretion, declines to maintain jurisdiction to enforce the 2 terms of the parties’ agreement. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 3 381 (1994); cf. Collins v. Thompson, 8 F.3d 657, 659 (9th Cir. 1993). Unless there is some 4 independent basis for federal jurisdiction, enforcement of the agreement is for state 5 courts. Kokkonen, 511 U.S. at 382. 6 SO ORDERED THIS 4th day of June, 2014. 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.