United States v. Approximately $188,570.45 seized from Educational Employees Credit Union

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 15, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00039
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 UNITED STATES, Case No. 1:25-cv-00039-EPG 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER SETTING DEADLINE RE: DEFAULT JUDGMENT 12 APPROXIMATELY $188,570.45 SEIZED FROM EDUCATIONAL EMPLOYEES 13 CREDIT UNION, et al., (ECF No. 24) 14 Defendants.

15 16 This is a civil forfeiture action. (ECF No. 1). Following the parties’ consent, the 17 previously assigned District Judge issued an order on July 14, 2025, reassigning the case to the 18 undersigned for all further proceedings. (ECF No. 28). Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation for final judgment of forfeiture. (ECF 19 No. 24). Generally, the stipulation between Plaintiff United States and the only claimant in the 20 case, Regina Marie Halderman, agrees to a forfeiture of certain funds to Plaintiff and other funds 21 being returned to Regina Marie Halderman. Within the stipulation is the following request: 22 “Pursuant to Local Rule 540, the United States and claimant request that, as a part of the Final 23 Judgment of Forfeiture in this case, the Court enter a default judgment against the interest, if any, 24 of The Estate of Douglas Halderman without further notice.” (Id. at 2). This refers to the fact that 25 the Clerk entered a default against The Estate of Douglas Halderman on June 18, 2025.1 (ECF 26 No. 22). 27 1 Given the entry of default, the Court will direct the Clerk of Court to terminate the request for Clerk’s 28 entry of default as no longer pending. (ECF No. 15). 1 However, the request for the Court to enter a default judgment is not accompanied by any 2 motion. See Local Rule 540(d) (“Upon a showing that no one has appeared to claim the property 3 and give security, and that due notice of the action and arrest of the property has been given, a 4 party may move for judgment at any time after the time for answer has expired.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1) (noting that “[a] request for a court order must be made by motion”). Accordingly, the 5 Court will set a deadline for Plaintiff to move for default judgment under Rule 55(b)(2). 6 Additionally, the Court advises Plaintiff of the following basic requirements for a motion for 7 default judgment.2 8 The motion must establish proper service and the Court’s jurisdiction. In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 9 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999) (“When entry of judgment is sought against a party who has failed to 10 plead or otherwise defend, a district court has an affirmative duty to look into its jurisdiction over 11 both the subject matter and the parties.”); see S.E.C. v. Internet Sols. for Bus. Inc., 509 F.3d 1161, 12 1165 (9th Cir. 2007) (“We review de novo whether default judgment is void because of lack of 13 personal jurisdiction due to insufficient service of process.”). 14 The motion must address the relevant factors regarding default judgment. See Eitel v. 15 McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986) (noting seven factors that courts may consider 16 before exercising discretion to enter default judgment). Here, the complaint identifies two claims 17 for relief. Plaintiff must independently address each claim.3 18 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 19 1. The Clerk of Court shall terminate the request for Clerk’s entry of default as no longer 20 pending. (ECF No. 15). 21 2. Plaintiff has until August 15, 2025, to move for default judgment against The Estate of 22 Douglas Halderman. 23 3. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment shall provide argument, including citation to the record and relevant legal authority, in addressing the requirements discussed above and 24 any other applicable requirements. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1)(B). 25

26 2 This order does not purport to advise Plaintiff of all applicable requirements. 3 The complaint appears to assert that certain criminal offenses, including 18 U.S.C. § 922(l) render 27 forfeiture applicable through 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). (ECF No. 1, p. 7). However, the Court notes that § 922(l) is not a listed offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). Plaintiff should make sure to clearly identify the 28 statutory basis for forfeiture for both claims for relief in its motion for default judgment. 1 > IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: _ July 15, 2025 [sf ey 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28