You're viewing Docket Item 30 from the case United States of America v. $367,320.00 in United States Currency. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 3:12-cv-00630-LRH-WGC Document 30 Filed 06/05/13 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

* * * * *

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.
$367,320.00 IN UNITED STATES
CURRENCY,



Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:12-cv-00630-LRH-WGC
ORDER

Before the court are the Government’s Motion to Strike Claim of Right or Interest and

1

Contesting of Forfeiture (#10 ) and the Government’s Motion to Strike Amended Claim of Right
or Interest and Contesting of Forfeiture (#26). Claimant Aaron Jacob Mangin (“Mangin”) has
filed objections to both motions (##17, 27), to which the Government has replied (##19, 28).
I.

Facts and Procedural History
Following the Government’s seizure of $367,320.00 from Mangin, it filed its Complaint
for Forfeiture in Rem (#1), to which Mangin filed his Claim of Right or Interest and Contesting
of Forfeiture (#9). After the Government’s Motion to Strike Claim for failure to comply with
Supplemental Rule G(5) (#10), Mangin filed his Amended Claim (#13) and his objection to the
Government’s Motion to Strike Claim (#17). The Government replied to Mangin’s objection
(#19) and also moved to strike his Amended Claim, stating that a claim is not a pleading, and
thus it cannot be amended (#26). Mangin’s objection to the Government’s Motion to Strike
Amended Claim (#27) and the Government’s reply to that objection followed thereafter (#28).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Refers to the court’s docket number.

Case 3:12-cv-00630-LRH-WGC Document 30 Filed 06/05/13 Page 2 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

II.

Discussion
Supplemental Rule of Federal Civil Procedure G governs civil forfeiture actions.

Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(i)(B) requires a person asserting an interest in seized property to file
a claim “identify[ing] the claimant and stat[ing] the claimant’s interest in the property.” To state
an interest in the property, however, requires “more than conclusory or hearsay allegations of
some ‘interest’ in the forfeited property.” United States v. $100,348.00 in U.S. Currency, 354
F.3d 1110, 1119 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting Baker v. United States, 722 F.2d 517, 519 (9th Cir.
1983)).

Under Supplemental Rule G(8)(c)(i)(A), a claim may be stricken for failure to comply
with Supplemental Rule G(5). Mangin’s original claim that he “has a right or interest in said
$367,320.00 in U.S. Currency” is the type of conclusory allegation generally struck under
Supplemental Rule G(8)(c)(i)(A). As such, the court grants the Government’s Motion and strikes
Mangin’s original Claim.

As to Mangin’s Amended Claim, the Government maintains it is not a pleading, and thus
it cannot be amended pursuant to Rule 15 of Federal Civil Procedure. Several factors, however,
suggest that claims are pleadings and can be amended under Rule 15. First, claims to seized
property, along with answers to the complaint, compose Supplemental Rule G(5), which is
entitled “Responsive Pleadings.” Second, the Advisory Committee Notes to Supplemental Rule
G(5) state that the word “‘[c]laim’ is used to describe this first pleading because of the statutory
references to claim and claimant.” FED. R. CIV. P. G(5) advisory committee’s note (emphasis
added). Finally, and perhaps most relevantly, the Advisory Committee Notes to Supplemental
Rule G(8) advise courts to strike claims for “failure to comply with the pleading requirements of
subdivision G(5) . . . only if satisfied that an opportunity should not be afforded to cure the
defects under Rule 15.” FED. R. CIV. P. G(8) advisory committee’s note; see also United States v.
$91,110.00 in U.S. Currency, No. 2:12-CV-01112, 2013 WL 1189700, *2 (D. Nev. Mar. 21,
2013). Thus, the court finds Mangin’s Amended Claim is appropriate under Rule 15(a)(1)(A).
Therefore, the court shall deny the Government’s Motion to Strike the Amended Claim.
///

2

Case 3:12-cv-00630-LRH-WGC Document 30 Filed 06/05/13 Page 3 of 3

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Government’s Motion to Strike Claim of Right
or Interest and Contesting of Forfeiture (#10) is GRANTED. Mangin’s Claim of Right or Interest
and Contesting of Forfeiture (#9) is STRICKEN.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Government’s Motion to Strike Amended Claim of

Right or Interest and Contesting of Forfeiture (#26) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 4th day of June, 2013.

_______________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3