United States v. $35,412.00 in U.S. Currency

E.D. North Carolina

United States v. $35,412.00 in U.S. Currency

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina

DecidedJune 26, 2025

Docket5:24-cv-00574

StatusUnknown

This text of United States v. $35,412.00 in U.S. Currency (United States v. $35,412.00 in U.S. Currency) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. $35,412.00 in U.S. Currency, (E.D.N.C. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION NO. 5: 24-CV-00574-BO-RN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, _) Plaintiff, ) ORDER v. ) ) $35,412.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, ) Defendant. This matter comes before the court on the government’s motion to strike claimant Laiyi Mu’s (Mu) claim for failure to comply with Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(Qi). For the below-stated reason, the court grants the government’s motion to strike. BACKGROUND The government filed a complaint in rem against $35,412.00 in U. S. currency seized on January 19, 2024. D.E. 1. Mu moved for an extension of time to file a claim and answer, which the court granted. D.E. 8; Text Order dated March 26, 2025. In April 2025, Mu’s counsel filed a pleading styled as a claim and answer. D.E. 9. ANALYSIS Courts require strict adherence to the Supplemental Rules and claimants must follow the requirements “to the letter.” United States v. Borromeo, 945 F.2d 750, 752 (4th Cir. 1991). Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(i)(C) requires that a claim must be signed by the claimant under penalty of perjury. The requirement that a claimant sign the

claim under penalty of perjury is the “most significant” of the Rule G(5) requirements. United States v. Thach, No. CIV.A. DKC 13-1984, 2018 WL 5177311, at *4 (D. Md. Sept. 12, 2013) (citation omitted). The verification requirement is a necessary safeguard against the filing of false claims. United States v. $104,25000 in U.S. Currency, 947 F. Supp. 2d 560, 564 (D. Md. 2013). Mu did not sign the claim and answer. The government argues that because Mu failed to sign the claim stating her interest under penalty of perjury, the court should strike her claim for failing to comply with Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(i). The court agrees, and therefore grants the government’s motion. CONCLUSION For the stated reason, the court grants the government’s motion to strike.

SO ORDERED this ae Yur , 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION NO. 5: 24-CV-00574-BO-RN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, _) Plaintiff, ) ORDER v. ) ) $35,412.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, ) Defendant. This matter comes before the court on the government’s motion to strike claimant Laiyi Mu’s (Mu) claim for failure to comply with Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(Qi). For the below-stated reason, the court grants the government’s motion to strike. BACKGROUND The government filed a complaint in rem against $35,412.00 in U. S. currency seized on January 19, 2024. D.E. 1. Mu moved for an extension of time to file a claim and answer, which the court granted. D.E. 8; Text Order dated March 26, 2025. In April 2025, Mu’s counsel filed a pleading styled as a claim and answer. D.E. 9. ANALYSIS Courts require strict adherence to the Supplemental Rules and claimants must follow the requirements “to the letter.” United States v. Borromeo, 945 F.2d 750, 752 (4th Cir. 1991). Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(i)(C) requires that a claim must be signed by the claimant under penalty of perjury. The requirement that a claimant sign the

claim under penalty of perjury is the “most significant” of the Rule G(5) requirements. United States v. Thach, No. CIV.A. DKC 13-1984, 2018 WL 5177311, at *4 (D. Md. Sept. 12, 2013) (citation omitted). The verification requirement is a necessary safeguard against the filing of false claims. United States v. $104,25000 in U.S. Currency, 947 F. Supp. 2d 560, 564 (D. Md. 2013). Mu did not sign the claim and answer. The government argues that because Mu failed to sign the claim stating her interest under penalty of perjury, the court should strike her claim for failing to comply with Supplemental Rule G(5)(a)(i). The court agrees, and therefore grants the government’s motion. CONCLUSION For the stated reason, the court grants the government’s motion to strike.

SO ORDERED this ae Yur , 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

United States v. $35,412.00 in U.S. Currency, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-3541200-in-us-currency-nced-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack