United States v. Approximately $20

          PHILLIP A. TALBERT Assistant United States Attorney KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorneys for the United States

          CONSENT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE

          Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge

         Pursuant to the Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture, the Court finds:

1. On February 9, 2016, agents with the United States Postal Inspection Service (“USPIS”) seized approximately $20, 150.00 in U.S. Currency (“the defendant currency”) from Mei during a parcel interdiction at the Processing and Distribution Center located in West Sacramento, California.

2. USPIS commenced administrative forfeiture proceedings, sending direct written notice to all known potential claimants and publishing notice to all others. On or about March 28, 2016, USPIS received a claim from Mei asserting an ownership interest in the defendant currency.

3. The United States represents that it could show at a forfeiture trial that on February 9, 2016, USPIS conducted a parcel interdiction at the Processing and Distribution Center located at 3775 Industrial Boulevard, West Sacramento, California. During the interdiction, law enforcement officials identified a parcel that bore markers consistent with parcels used for shipping contraband. The package was addressed to Zhong Sheng Li (“Li”), 5663 71^st Street, Sacramento, California, 95824-2109, with the following return address: Chris Mei, 255 West 24^th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60617.

4. The United States represents that it could further show at a forfeiture trial that law enforcement officials contacted Mei, who confirmed he had sent a package containing cash to Li. Law enforcement officials contacted Li, who said he was expecting a “Chinese New Year” gift from Mei. Li gave consent to open the parcel. The parcel was presented to a drug detection dog, who positively alerted to the presence of the odor of narcotics. Upon opening the parcel, law enforcement agents discovered a plastic shopping bag containing a text book and multiple dryer sheets inside a vacuum sealed bag. Concealed within the text book’s pages were 201 $100 bills and 1 $50 bill; the defendant currency.

5. The United States could further show at a forfeiture trial that the defendant currency is forfeitable to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6).

6. Without admitting the truth of the factual assertions contained in this stipulation, claimant specifically denying the same, and for the purpose of reaching an amicable resolution and compromise of this matter, claimant agrees that an adequate factual basis exists to support forfeiture of the defendant currency. Chris Mei hereby acknowledges that he is the sole owner of the defendant currency, and that no other person or entity has any legitimate claim of interest therein. Should any person or entity institute any kind of claim or action against the government with regard to its forfeiture of the defendant currency, claimant shall hold harmless and indemnify the United States, as set forth below.

7. This Court has jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1345 and 1355, as this is the judicial district in which acts or omissions giving rise to the forfeiture occurred.

8. This Court has venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1395, as this is the judicial district in which the defendant currency was seized.

9. The parties herein desire to settle this matter pursuant to the terms of a duly executed Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture.

         Based upon the above findings, and the files and records of the Court, it is hereby ORDERED

1. The Court adopts the Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture entered into by and ...