The equitable sharing program distributes a share of the proceeds of federally forfeited property to “any State or local law enforcement agency which participated directly in the seizure or forfeiture of the property.” 21 U.S.C. § 881(e)(1)(A). 29.

Therefore, the government’s failure to attempt to resolve the matter and avoid needless litigation, in addition to the baseless and legally insufficient complaint as filed justify an award of attorney fees to the claimant. CONCLUSION Contrary to Supp’l Rule G (2), the complaint fails to state sufficiently detailed facts to support a reasonable belief that the government will be able to meet its burden of proof at trial that by a preponderance of the evidence there was a substantial connection between Defendant funds and a drug offense specified in 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). USCS Admiralty and Maritime Claims R G (2)(e) and (f); 18 USC § 983 (c) (1) and (3).

BACKGROUND On April 10, 2007, plaintiff initiated this case by filing a Verified Complaint of Forfeiture alleging that the defendant U.S. Currency was furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for a controlled substance or represents proceeds traceable to such an exchange and is therefore subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6) and 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), and that the defendant vehicle was used or intended for use, to transport, or in any manner facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession or concealment of a controlled substance or other property described in 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(1), Case 1:07-cv-00277-TDS -PTS Document 27 Filed 12/03/07 Page 1 of 5 1Kendal Brumby, a/k/a Ken d El Bey, brother of Joseph Brumby, subsequently filed various motions and petitions in response to Plaintiff’s Complaint, all of which are pending. 2 (2) or (9) and is therefore subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4). Joseph Brumby, Jr. was served via certified mail on July 13, 2007 with the Verified Complaint of Forfeiture, Warrant for Arrest, and Legal Notice.1 On October 29, 2007, Joseph Brumby, Jr., a/k/a Yasir Justice El Bey, filed a Request To Release Seized Property (Dkt.

As a result, the administrative forfeiture process was terminated and the seizure was referred to the United States Attorney’s Office for judicial forfeiture. On April 10, 2007, plaintiff initiated this case by filing a Verified Complaint of Forfeiture alleging that the defendant U.S. Currency was furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for a controlled substance or represents proceeds traceable to such an exchange and is therefore subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6) and 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), and that the defendant vehicle was used or intended for use, to transport, or in any manner facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possess or concealment of a controlled substance or other property described in 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(1), (2) or (9) and is therefore subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4). Case 1:07-cv-00277-TDS -PTS Document 23 Filed 11/21/07 Page 3 of 14 4 On August 2, 2007, Claimant Kendal Brumby a/k/a Ken d El Bey filed a "Motion by Affidavit in Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint of Forfeiture" (Dkt.

during a traffic stop, no other indicia of drug trafficking was found); United States v. $ 58,920.00 in United States Currency, 385 F. Supp. 2d 144, 153 (D.P.R. 2005) (stating that the police dog’s “alert to the currency may also be worth noting, although perhaps worth little else” and finding the government failed to establish even probable cause where the only other evidence included claimants’ “nervousness,” the fact that they bought one-way tickets in cash, and had concealed the defendant currency in the pantleg of jeans inside their suitcases); United States v. $17,700.00 in U.S. Currency, CV 08-4518-ABC-JCX, 2008 WL 4838491, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2008) (internal quotation omitted) (“a positive dog alert must be combined with other credible evidence clearly connecting the money to drugs” to establish that currency is forfeitable). The uncontroverted material facts of this case indicate that the Government cannot meet its burden in seeking forfeiture of assets under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6), and summary judgment in Claimant James Kirkham’s favor is appropriate. IV.

2. As explained in the Verified Complaint, the Defendant Currency is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6) because it constitutes (1) money, negotiable instruments, securities and other things of value furnished and intended to be furnished in exchange for a controlled substance in violation of the Controlled Substances Act; (2) proceeds traceable to such Case 1:12-cv-02394-ELH Document 5 Filed 02/13/13 Page 1 of 3 an exchange; and (3) money, negotiable instruments, and securities used and intended to be used to facilitate a violation of the Controlled Substances Act. 3.

(Copies of the stipulations are attached as Government Group Exhibit “D.”) 10. Based on the verified complaint for forfeiture and the attached affidavit of Task Force Officer Efrain Mata of the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”), the United States has established that the defendant funds in the amount of $96,160.00, were furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for a controlled substance, were the proceeds from the sale of a controlled substance, and were monies used and intended to be used to facilitate narcotics trafficking, in a 2 Case: 1:10-cv-03208 Document #: 14 Filed: 10/04/10 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:27 violation of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801, et seq., and are therefore forfeitable to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). WHEREFORE, the United States of America requests that this court enter a default decree of forfeiture in favor of the United States of America and against the defendant funds.

.. 6, 10 16 17 16 U.S.C. § 19jj-1 ............................................................ 16 18 16 U. S. C. § 19jj -1 (a) ........................................................... 6 19 20 16 U. S ,C. § 19jj -1 (b) ........................................................... 6 21 2 2 16 U. S . C. § 19jj -1 (c) ........................................................... 7 23 24 16 U.S.C. § 19jj-1(d) ....................................................... 2, 7, 8 25 26 21 U.S.C. § 881 .............................................................. 18 27 21 U.S.C. § 881 (a)(2) . .

Malpractice CIVIL RIGHTS D 440 Other Civil Rights 0 44 1 Voting D 442 Employment D !,~~:~':,"~d~!ions PERSONAL INJURY D 365 Personal Injmy - Product Liability D 367 Health Care/ Pharmaceutical Personal Injmy Product Liability D 368 Asbestos Personal lnjtuy Product Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY D 370 Other Fraud D 37 I Truth in Lending D 380 Other Personal Property Damage D 385 Property Damage Product Liability PRISONER PETITIONS Habeas Corpus: D 463 Alien Detainee D ~~~te~~tions to Vacate Other: D 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - D 530 General Employment D 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - Other D 448 Education D D D D 535 Death Penalty 540 Mandamus & Other 550 Civil Rights 555 Prison Condition 560 Civil Detainee - D Conditions of Confinement FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY D 625 Drug Related Seizure of Property 21 USC 881 ~ 690 Other LABOR D 710 Fair Labor Standards Act D 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations D 740 Railway Labor Act D 751 Family and Medical Leave Act D 790 Other Labor Litigation D 79 1 Empt. Ret. Inc. Security Act IMMIGRATION D 462 Naturalization Application D 465 Other Immigration Actions 0 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 D 423 Withdrawal 28 USC 157 PROPERTY RIGHTS D 820 Copyrights D 830 Patent D 835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application D 840 Trademark SOCIAL SECURITY 0 861 HIA(l395ff) D 862 Black Lung (923) 0 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 0 864 SSID Title XV I 0 865 RSI (405(g)) FEDERAL TAX SUITS D 870 Taxes (U .S. Plaintiff or Defendant) D t7slc ifos 9 - Third Party 26 D 6 D 6 OTHER STATUTES D 375 False Claims Act 0 376 Qui Tam (3I USC 3729 (a)) D 400 State Reapportionment D 410 Antitrust D 430 Banks and Banking D 450 Commerce D 460 Deportation D 4 70 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations D 480 Consumer Credit 0 490 Cable/Sat TV D 850 Securities/Com

r Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant) ’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4 of Business In This State ’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5 Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6 Foreign Country IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES ’ 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY ’ 625 Drug Related Seizure ’ 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 ’ 375 False Claims Act ’ 120 Marine ’ 310 Airplane ’ 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 ’ 423 Withdrawal ’ 376 Qui Tam (31 USC ’ 130 Miller Act ’ 315 Airplane Product Product Liability ’ 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a)) ’ 140 Negotiable Instrument Li