Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Approximately $18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 1, 2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
APPROXIMATELY $18,700.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF CLAIMANTS' MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT (Docs. 20 and 25)

Claimants Mario Castro and Joe Sandoval, Jr., by their attorneys Bonakdar Law Firm, moved to set aside the Court's entry of default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture, entered June 13, 2012, of $18,700.00 of U.S. currency seized in the course of the execution of a search warrant. This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302 and 72-304.

On March 11, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations recommending that Claimants' motion be denied. The Findings and Recommendations provided fifteen days for the filing of objections.

On March 27, 2013, quoting part of F.R.Civ.P. 55(c), Claimants objected, contending that good cause existed to set aside the default. Because Claimants moved to set aside a default judgment, they apply the wrong standard. Rule 55(c) (emphasis added) provides:

The court may set aside an entry of default for good cause, and it may set aside a default judgment under Rule 60(b).

Good cause is not the applicable standard of Rule 60(b), which provides, in relevant part, that a court may set aside a judgment as a result of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (Claimants did not argue that newly discovered evidence, fraud, or a void judgment existed.)

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Claimants failed to establish grounds to set aside the default judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations, filed March 11, 2013, are adopted in full.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130401

© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.