28 C.F.R. § 9.3

Petitions in administrative forfeiture cases

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Notice of seizure. The notice of seizure and intent to forfeit the property shall advise any persons who may have a present ownership interest in the property to submit their petitions for remission or mitigation within 30 days of the date they receive the notice in order to facilitate processing. Petitions shall be considered any time after notice until the property has been forfeited, except in cases involving petitions to restore the proceeds from the sale of forfeited property. A notice of seizure shall include the title of the seizing agency, the ruling official, the mailing and street address of the official to whom petitions should be sent, and an asset identifier number.

(b) Persons who may file. (1) A petition for remission or mitigation must be filed by a petitioner as defined in § 9.2 or as prescribed in § 9.9(g) and (h). A person or person on their behalf may not file a petition if, after notice or knowledge of the fact that a warrant or process has been issued for his apprehension, in order to avoid criminal prosecution, the person:

(i) Purposely leaves the jurisdiction of the United States;

(ii) Declines to enter or reenter the United States to submit to its jurisdiction; or

(iii) Otherwise evades the jurisdiction of the court in which a criminal matter is pending against the person.

(2) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section applies to a petition filed by a corporation if any majority shareholder, or individual filing the claim on behalf of the corporation:

(i) Purposely leaves the jurisdiction of the United States;

(ii) Declines to enter or reenter the United States to submit to its jurisdiction; or

(iii) Otherwise evades the jurisdiction of the court in which a criminal matter is pending against the person.

(i) The name, address, and social security or other taxpayer identification number of the person claiming an interest in the seized property who is seeking remission or mitigation;

(ii) The name of the seizing agency, the asset identifier number, and the date and place of seizure;

(iii) A complete description of the property, including make, model, and serial numbers, if any; and

(iv) A description of the petitioner's interest in the property as owner, lienholder, or otherwise, supported by original or certified bills of sale, contracts, deeds, mortgages, or other documentary evidence. Such documentation includes evidence establishing the source of funds for seized currency or the source of funds used to purchase the seized asset.

(2) Any factual recitation or documentation of any type in a petition must be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury that meets the requirements of 28 U.S.C. 1746.

(d) Releases. In addition to the contents of the petition for remission or mitigation set forth in paragraph (c) of this section, upon request of the agency, the petitioner shall also furnish the agency with an instrument executed by the titled or registered owner and any other known claimant of an interest in the property releasing interest in such property.

(e) Filing petition with agency. (1) A petition for remission or mitigation subject to administrative forfeiture is to be sent to the official address provided in the notice of seizure and shall be sworn to by the petitioner or by the petitioner's attorney upon information and belief, supported by the client's sworn notice of representation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, as set out in § 9.9(g).

(2) If the notice of seizure does not provide an official address, the petition shall be addressed to the appropriate federal agency as follows:

(i)(A) DEA: All submissions must be filed with the Forfeiture Counsel, Asset Forfeiture Section, Office of Chief Counsel, Drug Enforcement Administration, HQS Forfeiture Response, P.O. Box 1475, Quantico, Virginia 22134-1475.

(B) Correspondence via private delivery must be filed with The Forfeiture Counsel, Asset Forfeiture Section (CCF), Office of Chief Counsel, Drug Enforcement Administration, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

(ii)(A) FBI: All submissions must be filed with the FBI Special Agent in Charge at the Field Office that seized the property.

(B) Submission by facsimile or other electronic means will not be accepted.

(iii)(A) ATF: All submissions must be filed with the Office of Chief Counsel, Attention: Forfeiture Counsel, 99 New York Avenue NE., Washington, DC 20226.

(B) Submission by facsimile or other electronic means will not be accepted.

(f) Agency investigation. Upon receipt of a petition, the seizing agency shall investigate the merits of the petition and may prepare a written report containing the results of that investigation. This report shall be submitted to the ruling official for review and consideration.

(g) Ruling. Upon receipt of the petition and the agency report, the ruling official for the seizing agency shall review the petition and the report, if any, and shall rule on the merits of the petition. No hearing shall be held.

(h) Petitions granted. If the ruling official grants a remission or mitigation of the forfeiture, a copy of the decision shall be mailed to the petitioner or, if represented by an attorney, to the petitioner's attorney. A copy shall also be sent to the United States Marshals Service (USMS) or other property custodian. The written decision shall include the terms and conditions, if any, upon which the remission or mitigation is granted and the procedures the petitioner must follow to obtain release of the property or the monetary interest therein.

(i) Petitions denied. If the ruling official denies a petition, a copy of the decision shall be mailed to the petitioner or, if represented by an attorney, to the petitioner's attorney of record. A copy of the decision shall also be sent to the USMS or other property custodian. The decision shall specify the reason that the petition was denied. The decision shall advise the petitioner that a request for reconsideration of the denial of the petition may be submitted to the ruling official in accordance with paragraph (j) of this section.

(j) Request for reconsideration. (1) A request for reconsideration of the denial of the petition shall be considered if:

(i) It is postmarked or received by the office of the ruling official within 10 days from the receipt of the notice of denial of the petition by the petitioner; and

(ii) The request is based on information or evidence not previously considered that is material to the basis for the denial or presents a basis clearly demonstrating that the denial was erroneous.

(2) In no event shall a request for reconsideration be decided by the same ruling official who ruled on the original petition.

(3) Only one request for reconsideration of a denial of a petition shall be considered.

(k) Restoration of proceeds from sale. (1) A petition for restoration of the proceeds from the sale of forfeited property, or for the appraised value of forfeited property when the forfeited property has been retained by or delivered to a government agency for official use, may be submitted by an owner or lienholder in cases in which the petitioner:

(i) Did not know of the seizure prior to the entry of a declaration of forfeiture; and

(ii) Could not reasonably have known of the seizure prior to the entry of a declaration of forfeiture.

(2) Such a petition shall be submitted pursuant to paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section within 90 days of the date the property is sold or otherwise disposed of.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case: Mikhaylov v. United States

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mikhaylov v. United States (2014) nyed · cites it 2× “§ 1618 ; see also 28 C.F.R. § 9.3 (describing "petitions for remission or mitigation”).”

Martin v. Leonhart (2010) dcd · cites it 5× “18 at 2 (explaining that “[pjursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 9.3 (c)(l)(iv), the interest of a petitioner in the property, as owner or otherwise, must be supported by satisfactory documentary evidence, for example, employment records, financial statements, bank statements, or cancelled…”

Chike Okafor v. United States (2017) ca9 “§ 983 (a)(3)(A); 28 C.F.R. § 9.3 . In order to elect a judicial proceeding, the party must file a claim with the seizing agency by the deadline set forth in the notice sent by the agency.”

Martin Onwubiko v. United States (1992) ca2 “28 C.F.R. § 9.3 . If the claimant elects only this option,- the DEA “shall presume a valid forfeiture.”

Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Tandy (2009) cadc “28 C.F.R. § 9.3 . “Whether the property or a monetary equivalent will be remitted to an owner shall be determined at the discretion of the Ruling Official” within the DEA.”

Paret-Ruiz v. United States (2016) ca1 “2009) (citing 28 C.F.R. §§ 9.3 , 9.7). Two aspects of civil forfeiture are of particular note here.”

United States v. One 1972 Chevrolet Blazer Vehicle, S/n Cke182f185579 (1977) ca9 · cites it 2× “10 We note that the Claim of Owner *1390 was not in the form required by 28 C.F.R. § 9.3 . On the other hand, if the Government did view the claim as a proper petition, then apparently the Government failed to afford it the full investigation, fact development and written…”

COUNTY OF OAKLAND BY KUHN v. Vista Disposal, Inc. (1993) mied · cites it 2× “” 28 C.F.R. § 9.3 (c). Section 1963, the forfeiture provision of RICO, was amended in 1984 to provide notice and a hearing to third parties claiming an interest in the forfeited property.”

Jose Troconis-Escovar v. United States (2023) ca7 “See 28 C.F.R. §§ 9.3 , 9.5. The DEA’s notice included a prominent warning, in bolded, capitalized, and italicized text, about the conse- quence of failing to ﬁle a claim: No.”

Brown v. Government of the District of Columbia (2015) dcd “28 C.F.R. § 9.3 . After determining that petitions of remission filed by the pharmaceutical suppliers from whom the substances were seized did not constitute “claims” requiring a judicial hearing, the court rejected the suppliers’ argument that the lack of a hearing to challenge…”

United States v. Millan-Colon (1993) nysd · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 9.3 ; Onwubiko v. United States, 969 F.”

United States v. Terry Lee Wood, United States of America v. David Lee Hippen, United States of America v. Charles Kent (1988) ca8 “80; 28 C.F.R. §§ 9.3 and 9.4(f). Wood was advised of both of these options in the December 4, 1985 notification of seizure.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

— 28 C.F.R. § 9.3(f) — 1 case

Robinson v. Department of Homeland Security (2023) vid

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.