DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE
LLOYD D. GEORGE, District Judge.
The United States filed a verified Complaint for Forfeiture in Rem (ECF No. 1) on November 1, 2012. The Complaint (ECF No. 1) alleges the defendant property:
a. was furnished or was intended to be furnished in exchange for controlled substances in violation of Title II of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., and is subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6);
b. is proceeds traceable to exchanges of controlled substances in violation of Title II of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., and is subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6); and
c. was used or was intended to be used to facilitate violations of Title II of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., and is subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6).
Public notice of the forfeiture action and arrest was given to all persons and entities by publication on the official government website www.forfeiture.gov from November 30, 2013, through December 29, 2013. Notice of Filing Proof of Publication, ECF No. 16.
On November 5, 2012, the Court entered an Order for Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property and Notice (ECF No. 3) and issued the Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property (ECF No. 4).
Pursuant to the Order (ECF No. 3), the Complaint (ECF No. 1), the Order (ECF No. 3), the Summons and Warrant (ECF No. 4), and the Notice of Complaint for Forfeiture (ECF No. 10, p. 4-5, 21-22, 40-41, 56-57) were served on the defendant property and all persons claiming an interest in the defendant property. All persons interested in the defendant property were required to file their claims with the Clerk of the Court no later than 35 days after the notice of this action was sent by mail, followed by the filing of an answer to the Complaint within 21 days after the filing of their respective claims. Complaint, ECF No. 1; Order for Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property and Notice, ECF No. 3; Summons and Warrant Issued by the Clerk, ECF No. 4; Notice of Filing Service of Process, ECF No 10.
On January 2, 2013, the United States Marshals Service served the Complaint, the Order, the Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property, and the Notice by executing them on the defendant property. Notice of Filing Service of Process, ECF No. 10, p. 3-18.
On January 3, 2013, the United States Marshals Service served the Complaint, the Order, the Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property, and the Notice on Joseph James Meadows by regular mail and certified return receipt mail. Notice of Filing Service of Process, ECF No. 10, p. 19-54.
On January 30, 2013, the United States Marshals Service served the Complaint, the Order, the Summons and Warrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property, and the Notice on Joseph James Meadows, by and through his counsel Michael V. Cristalli, by personal, in-hand service. Notice of Filings Service of Process, ECF No. 10, p. 55-70.
On January 24, 2013, an Answer and a Claim were filed with the Court by Joseph James Meadows. Answer, ECF No. 5; Claim, ECF No. 6.
On November 15, 2013, a Stipulated Withdrawal of Claim was filed by Joseph James Meadows. Stipulated Withdrawal of Claim, ECF No. 14.
On November 25, 2013, an Order granting the Stipulated Withdrawal of Claim was entered by the Court. Order, ECF No. 15.
On February 5, 2014, the United States filed a Request for Entry of Default against the defendant property and all persons or entities who claim an interest in the defendant property in the above-entitled action. Request for Entry of Default, ECF No. 17.
On February 6, 2014, the Clerk of the Court entered a Default against the defendant property and all persons or entities who claim an interest in the defendant property in the above-entitled action. Default, ECF No. 18.
No other person or entity has filed a claim, answer, or responsive pleading within the time permitted by 18 U.S.C.§ 983(a)(4) and Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Rule G(4) and (5).
Joseph James Meadows is not in the military service within the purview of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.
The allegations of the Complaint are sustained by the evidence and are adopted as findings of fact. The Court concludes as a matter of law that the United States is entitled to the relief requested in the Complaint.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Default Judgment of Forfeiture be entered against: (a) $41,560.00 in United States Currency; (b) Joseph James Meadows; and (c) all other persons or entities who may claim an interest in the defendant property in the above-entitled action.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that said property be, and the same is hereby forfeited to the United States of America, and no right, title, or interest in the property shall exist in any other party.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465(a)(2), that there was reasonable cause for the seizure or arrest of the defendant property.
