From the court’s minute order:
MINUTES OF MOVANT’S MOTION FOR RETURN OF SEIZED PROPERTY PURSUANT TO FED.R.CR.PROC.419g)(Filed 04/17/15)Motion Hearing held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: Hearing held and counsel are present. The Court is in receipt of the parties’ Status Report. Counsel inform the Court of the status of the case and the scheduled return of property, as stated in Court and on the record. Counsel are to contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk with an update on May 21, 2015. If counsel need the Court’s assistance, a Telephone Status Conference will be set on May 22, 2015.Court Reporter: Larua Elias.(bp)
We posted materials on this case here.
Here is the motion in In Re 365,380 Ea 640 Boxes of Cigarettes worth 568,000.00 (Big Sandy Tobacco Redistribution) (C.D. Cal.):
1 Motion for Return of Seized Property
Here is the order:
DCT Order on Civil Penalty
Prior materials here, here, and here.
Here is the indictment in United States v. Sheffler (W.D. Mo.):
News coverage here.
Here are the materials in City of New York v. Gordon (S.D. N.Y.):
DCT Order Granting Injunction
City Motion for PI
Gordon Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff, the City of New York (“the City”), brought this action seeking injunctive relief, penalties, and damages for violations of the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (“PACT Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 375 et seq.; the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act (“CCTA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2341 et seq.; the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act (“CMSA”), N.Y. Tax L. § 483 et seq.; and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. The City has moved for a preliminary injunction pursuant to Rule 65(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, enjoining Defendants Robert and Marcia Gordon (together “the Gordon Defendants”) from violating the PACT Act and the CMSA; and Defendants Marcia Gordon and Regional Integrated Logistics, Inc. d/b/a Regional Parcel Services (“RPS”) from violating the CCTA. Defendants have moved to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons that follow, the City’s motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED, and the Defendants’ motions to dismiss are DENIED.
Here are the materials:
DCT Memorandum & Order
Remaining Defendants’ Cross-Motion
For the reasons below, the Court grants the City summary judgment as to defendants’ liability under the CCTA and the CMSA. With respect to relief, the Court (1) grants the requested permanent injunction against defendants’ “purchase, receipt, possession, sale, distribution, offer and advertisement of unstamped cigarettes-even to tribe members for personal use”; (2) awards damages as against the Peace Pipe and TDM defendants; (3) awards civil penalties as against the Red Dot defendants, the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing; and (4) awards the City attorney’s fees, the amount of which will be determined in the first instance by Magistrate Judge Vera Scanlon by report and recommendation.
And the bad news (liability):
For the reasons stated, the Court concludes the following: As to defendant Phillips, the City is directed to clarify whether it is still seeking monetary relief against him, and if so, to submit further damages briefing that identifies the amounts the City is seeking against Phillips only. As to the Peace Pipe, TDM, and Red Dot defendants, the Court finds that the City is entitled to summary judgment on (1) defendants’ liability under the CCTA and the CMSA, and (2) its requested permanent injunction against defendants’ “purchase, receipt, possession, sale, distribution, offer and advertisement of unstamped cigarettes-even to tribe members for personal use.” In addition, the Court awards to the City (1) damages in the amount of $10,041,075 as against the Peace Pipe defendants and $450,000 as against the TDM defendants; (2) civil penalties as against the Red Dot defendants, the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing; and (3) attorney’s fees, the amount of which will be determined in the first instance by Magistrate Judge Scanlon by report and recommendation.
Prior posts here and here.
Here are the materials so far in United States v. Nappi (W.D. N.Y.):
Nappi Motion to Dismiss
Magistrate R&R in US v Nappi