United States v. $1,317,828.00 In United States Currency

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided June 12, 2023·No. 2:22-cv-00098·Unknown

Opinion

United States Attorney Nevada Bar No. 7709 DANIEL D. HOLLINGSWORTH Assistant United States Attorney Nevada Bar No. 1925 501 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 388-6336 Daniel.Hollingsworth@usdoj.gov Attorneys for the United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 2:22-CV-098-APG-EJY ) Plaintiff, ) Stipulation for Entry of Judgment of ) Forfeiture as to Kwanfei Chau, Chung v. ) Lung Cheng’s wife, and Order ) US $1,317,828, ) ) Defendant. )

The United States of America and Kwanfei Chau (Chau), Chung Lung Cheng’s

wife, through her counsel, David Chesnoff and Richard Schonfeld, agree to settle this case

as follows:

1. This civil forfeiture in rem action seeks to forfeit United States currency for

violations of 31 U.S.C. §§ 5316(a)(1)(B) and 5324(c) under 31 U.S.C. § 5317(c)(2).

2. If this case were not settled the United States would seek to prove the US

$1,317,828 was proceeds not declared in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§ 5316(a)(1)(B) and

5324(c) and are forfeitable under 31 U.S.C. § 5317(c)(2). The United States would seek to

prove by a preponderance of the evidence the following.

3. From on or about May 11, 1996, through on or about September 26, 2021, Cheng

flew into or out of multiple United States airports. CBP signage and public announcements

regarding the transportation of currency and smuggling existed in the international airports

where Cheng travelled. 4. On September 26, 2021, at approximately 9:24 am, Cheng, Passport KJ0715039,

applied for admission at the Harry Reid International Airport, Las Vegas, Nevada, United

States, private terminal via private flight tail number N318LS from Hong Kong, China.

5. A Customs and Border Protection Officer (CBPO) and a CBP Agriculture

Specialist (CBPAS) met Cheng inside his plane.

6. Lee, Sheung Ying, Passport KJ0464519, offered to translate, and the CBPO made

sure both Cheng and Lee were comfortable with translating before proceeding with any

questions. The CBPO wanted to ensure Cheng understood what was being asked. Both Lee

and Cheng agreed Lee would translate English to Chinese and from Chinese to English. Lee

translated without hesitation or delay. Cheng acknowledged he understood what was being

translated by his staff member Lee.

7. The CBPO asked Cheng if he had over US $10,000. Cheng declared he did not

have any currency and any form of monetary instruments over US $10,000. Cheng’s crew

staff member Lee, who was in the main cabin of the aircraft with Cheng, translated the

information.

8. The CBPO asked a second time if Cheng was bringing anything into the United

States to include currency or any form of monetary instruments over US $10,000 that he

would like to declare because undeclared items and currency can be seized in accordance

with CBP laws and regulations.

9. Cheng stalled and again stated he did not bringing more than US $10,000 into the

United States. Cheng declared he brought US $7,000. Cheng pulled the currency from his

black handbag he was personally carrying and showed currency for the CBPO and the

CBPAS to see. The CBPO and the CBPAS continued to inspect the rest of the aircraft and

asked one of the pilots to stay behind while the aircraft inspection was completed.

10. During the aircraft inspection, the CBPO moved the black carry-on bag that was

in the back of the plane to the aisle area so it could be more visible. The CBPO noticed the

black carry-on bag was heavier than normal for this size luggage.

/ / / 11. The CBPO proceeded to the CBP facility to conduct a secondary inspection.

Cheng properly filled out a CBP Customs Declaration form 6059B. Question 13 on the form

asks Cheng to declare currency or monetary instruments over the amount of US $10,000 or

foreign equivalent and informs the traveler that there is further guidance and explanation as

to the definition of monetary instruments on the back of the form.

12. Cheng reviewed the back of form 6059B, filled it out, signed it, and submitted it

to CBPO Raymond Rodriguez.

13. The CBPO gave Cheng a CBP form 0503 (the currency reporting advisement in

English). Lee also translated and explained form 0503 to ensure Cheng fully understood

what Cheng would acknowledge and sign. Cheng signed the CBP form 0503, declaring he

only brought US $7,000 into the United States.

14. The CBPO searched for, and found, a CBP form 0503 in Cheng’s Chinese

language to ensure further understanding. The CBPO provided the CBP form 0503 in

simple Chinese to Cheng. Cheng again stated he was only bringing US $7,000 U.S.

Currency and signed CBP form 0503 in Chinese. The CBPO advised Cheng that the CBPO

would verify his currency and inspect the luggage located inside the aircraft.

15. In Cheng’s black carry-on bag that was left on the aircraft between the bed and

wall that separates the restroom, a white Dior box contained US $260,000.

16. The CBPO asked Cheng if he knew undeclared currency was in the black carry-

on bag. Cheng admitted he owned the US $260,000 and knew the currency was in the black

carry-on bag.

17. The CBPO requested the rest of the bags located in the cargo hold of the aircraft.

A Dolce & Gabbana box was found inside a red suitcase containing US $1,000,000. An

extra US $50,000 was loose inside the same box. Cheng admitted he withdrew the currency

in small increments US $50,000 to US $100,000 from a bank over time and withdrew US

$1,000,000 at one time in September 2021. Cheng stated the withdrawals were from the

Bank of Communications in Hong Kong. He packed the currency in the boxes himself.

/ / / 18. The CBPO seized the US $1,317,828 for alleged bulk cash smuggling and failure

to report the currency. The denominations were as follows: 13,176 of US $100 bills, 8 US

$20 bills, 4 US $10 bills, 3 US $5 bills, and 13 US $1 bills.

19. This Stipulation for Entry of Judgment of Forfeiture as to Kwanfei Chau

(Stipulation) shall not constitute an admission of liability, wrongdoing, or fault on the part

of Chau. She entered into this Stipulation to avoid costs, expenses, uncertainty, delay, and

inconvenience of protracted litigation. The United States and Chau reach a full and final

settlement in this Stipulation. Chau knowingly and voluntarily agrees to forfeit US $370,500

of US $1,317,828 to the United States in this civil judicial forfeiture.

20. Chau knowingly and voluntarily agrees to forfeit all possessory rights, ownership

rights, and all rights, titles, and interests in the US $370,500 of the US $1,317,828.

21. Chau knowingly and voluntarily agrees this Court will impose the forfeiture of

the US $370,500 of the US $1,317,828 in this civil forfeiture case.

22. Chau knowingly and voluntarily agrees to waive her right to any civil judicial

forfeiture proceedings (proceedings) concerning the US $1,317,828.

23. Chau knowingly and voluntarily agrees to waive service of process of all

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. $1,317,828.00 In United States Currency, (D. Nev. 2023).

United States v. $1,317,828.00 In United States Currency (United States v. $1,317,828.00 In United States Currency) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Honeycutt v. United States
581 U.S. 443 (Supreme Court, 2017)
United States v. Vassily Thompson
990 F.3d 680 (Ninth Circuit, 2021)
United States v. Abhijit Prasad
18 F.4th 313 (Ninth Circuit, 2021)