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.

Landersman v. United States

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

January 7, 2014

MARK LANDERSMAN, ADVANCED MACHINING AND ENGINEERING, FOURTH STREET AUTO REPAIR, AMERICAN RELIANCE, AND REDNECKAND INJUNEARIN, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR., United States Attorney, ROBERT E. DUGDALE, Assistant United States Attorney, Chief, Criminal Division, STEVEN R. WELK, Assistant United States Attorney, Chief, Asset Forfeiture Section California Bar No. 149883, Attorneys for Defendant United States of America. [PROPOSED]

ORDER RE DISMISSAL OF MOTION FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY

GARY KLAUSNER, District Judge.

On August 28, 2013, Plaintiffs Mark Landersman ("Landersman"), Advanced Machining & Engineering, Fourth Street Auto Repair, American Reliance and Redneck Injunearin filed a motion for return of property pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g). Because there was no pending criminal case arising from the underlying facts, the motion was treated as a civil complaint for equitable relief.

On September 27, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a petition pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 983(f)(3) for the immediate release of some of the same property sought in the original motion. That petition was denied on November 4, 2013. The parties have made a stipulated request that Plaintiffs' Rule 41(g) motion for return of property be dismissed.

The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties, and finding good cause therefor, hereby orders the Plaintiffs' Rule 41(g) motion for return of property DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.