U.S. Code » Title 28 » Part PART VI— PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS › Chapter CHAPTER 163— FINES, PENALTIES AND FORFEITURES

28 U.S.C. § 2467

Enforcement of foreign judgment

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Definitions.—In this section—(1) the term “foreign nation” means a country that has become a party to the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (referred to in this section as the “United Nations Convention”) or a foreign jurisdiction with which the United States has a treaty or other formal international agreement in effect providing for mutual forfeiture assistance; and(2) the term “forfeiture or confiscation judgment” means a final order of a foreign nation compelling a person or entity—(A) to pay a sum of money representing the proceeds of an offense described in Article 3, Paragraph 1, of the United Nations Convention, any violation of foreign law that would constitute a violation or an offense for which property could be forfeited under Federal law if the offense were committed in the United States, or any foreign offense described in section 1956(c)(7)(B) of title 18, or property the value of which corresponds to such proceeds; or(B) to forfeit property involved in or traceable to the commission of such offense.(b)Review by Attorney General.—(1)In general.—A foreign nation seeking to have a forfeiture or confiscation judgment registered and enforced by a district court of the United States under this section shall first submit a request to the Attorney General or the designee of the Attorney General, which request shall include—(A) a summary of the facts of the case and a description of the proceedings that resulted in the forfeiture or confiscation judgment;(B) certified 11 So in original. Probably should be preceded by “a”. copy of the forfeiture or confiscation judgment;(C) an affidavit or sworn declaration establishing that the foreign nation took steps, in accordance with the principles of due process, to give notice of the proceedings to all persons with an interest in the property in sufficient time to enable such persons to defend against the charges and that the judgment rendered is in force and is not subject to appeal; and(D) such additional information and evidence as may be required by the Attorney General or the designee of the Attorney General.(2)Certification of request.—The Attorney General or the designee of the Attorney General shall determine whether, in the interest of justice, to certify the request, and such decision shall be final and not subject to either judicial review or review under subchapter II of chapter 5, or chapter 7, of title 5 (commonly known as the “Administrative Procedure Act”).(c)Jurisdiction and Venue.—(1)In general.—If the Attorney General or the designee of the Attorney General certifies a request under subsection (b), the United States may file an application on behalf of a foreign nation in district court of the United States seeking to enforce the foreign forfeiture or confiscation judgment as if the judgment had been entered by a court in the United States.(2)Proceedings.—In a proceeding filed under paragraph (1)—(A) the United States shall be the applicant and the defendant or another person or entity affected by the forfeiture or confiscation judgment shall be the respondent;(B) venue shall lie in the district court for the District of Columbia or in any other district in which the defendant or the property that may be the basis for satisfaction of a judgment under this section may be found; and(C) the district court shall have personal jurisdiction over a defendant residing outside of the United States if the defendant is served with process in accordance with rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.(d)Entry and Enforcement of Judgment.—(1)In general.—The district court shall enter such orders as may be necessary to enforce the judgment on behalf of the foreign nation unless the court finds that—(A) the judgment was rendered under a system that provides tribunals or procedures incompatible with the requirements of due process of law;(B) the foreign court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant;(C) the foreign court lacked jurisdiction over the subject matter;(D) the foreign nation did not take steps, in accordance with the principles of due process, to give notice of the proceedings to a person with an interest in the property of the proceedings 22 So in original. The words “of the proceedings” probably should not appear. in sufficient time to enable him or her to defend; or(E) the judgment was obtained by fraud.(2)Process.—Process to enforce a judgment under this section shall be in accordance with rule 69(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.(3)Preservation of property.—(A)Restraining orders.—(i)In general.—To preserve the availability of property subject to civil or criminal forfeiture under foreign law, the Government may apply for, and the court may issue, a restraining order at any time before or after the initiation of forfeiture proceedings by a foreign nation.(ii)Procedures.—(I)In general.—A restraining order under this subparagraph shall be issued in a manner consistent with subparagraphs (A), (C), and (E) of paragraph (1) and the procedural due process protections for a restraining order under section 983(j) of title 18.(II)Application.—For purposes of applying such section 983(j)—(aa) references in such section 983(j) to civil forfeiture or the filing of a complaint shall be deemed to refer to the applicable foreign criminal or forfeiture proceedings; and(bb) the reference in paragraph (1)(B)(i) of such section 983(j) to the United States shall be deemed to refer to the foreign nation.(B)Evidence.—The court, in issuing a restraining order under subparagraph (A)—(i) may rely on information set forth in an affidavit describing the nature of the proceeding or investigation underway in the foreign country, and setting forth a reasonable basis to believe that the property to be restrained will be named in a judgment of forfeiture at the conclusion of such proceeding; or(ii) may register and enforce a restraining order that has been issued by a court of competent jurisdiction in the foreign country and certified by the Attorney General pursuant to subsection (b)(2).(C)Limit on grounds for objection.—No person may object to a restraining order under subparagraph (A) on any ground that is the subject of parallel litigation involving the same property that is pending in a foreign court.(e)Finality of Foreign Findings.—In entering orders to enforce the judgment, the court shall be bound by the findings of fact to the extent that they are stated in the foreign forfeiture or confiscation judgment.(f)Currency Conversion.—The rate of exchange in effect at the time the suit to enforce is filed by the foreign nation shall be used in calculating the amount stated in any forfeiture or confiscation judgment requiring the payment of a sum of money submitted for registration.(Added Pub. L. 106–185, § 15(a), Apr. 25, 2000, 114 Stat. 219; amended Pub. L. 107–56, title III, § 323, Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 315; Pub. L. 111–342, § 2, Dec. 22, 2010, 124 Stat. 3607.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsecs. (c)(2)(C) and (d)(2), are set out in the Appendix to this title.

Amendments

2010—Subsec. (d)(3)(A). Pub. L. 111–342 amended subpar. (A) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “To preserve the availability of property subject to a foreign forfeiture or confiscation judgment, the Government may apply for, and the court may issue, a restraining order pursuant to section 983(j) of title 18, at any time before or after an application is filed pursuant to subsection (c)(1) of this section.”

2001—Subsec. (a)(2)(A). Pub. L. 107–56, § 323(4), inserted “, any violation of foreign law that would constitute a violation or an offense for which property could be forfeited under Federal law if the offense were committed in the United States” after “United Nations Convention”.

Subsec. (b)(1)(C). Pub. L. 107–56, § 323(2), substituted “establishing that the foreign nation took steps, in accordance with the principles of due process, to give notice of the proceedings to all persons with an interest in the property in sufficient time to enable such persons” for “establishing that the defendant received notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable the defendant”.

Subsec. (d)(1)(D). Pub. L. 107–56, § 323(3), substituted “the foreign nation did not take steps, in accordance with the principles of due process, to give notice of the proceedings to a person with an interest in the property” for “the defendant in the proceedings in the foreign court did not receive notice”.

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 107–56, § 323(1), added par. (3).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section applicable to any forfeiture proceeding commenced on or after the date that is 120 days after Apr. 25, 2000, see section 21 of Pub. L. 106–185, set out as an Effective Date of 2000 Amendment note under section 1324 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case: Gang Luan v. United States
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gang Luan v. United States (2013) cadc · cites it 19× “Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(3), the Justice Department filed an application for a restraining order in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, which granted the application.”
In Re SEIZURE OF APPROXIMATELY $12,116,153.16 AND ACCRUED INTEREST IN U.S. CURRENCY, Et Al. (2012) dcd · cites it 24× “Circuit ruled in a different case that 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(3) did not allow restraint of assets in the United States that had not yet been the subject of a final judgment of forfeiture in a foreign country.”
United States v. Federative Republic of Brazil (2014) ca2 · cites it 12× “At the same time, however, we recognize that 28 U.S.C. § 2467 — which permits the United States Attorney General, upon request of a foreign nation pursuant to a mutual forfeiture assistance treaty, to petition a United States court to enforce a foreign forfeiture judgment — is a…”
In re Restraint of all Assets Contained (2012) dcd · cites it 24× “1 On August 12, 2011, the United States applied to this Court for a restraining order under 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(3), claiming that a restraint on the three UBS accounts is necessary to preserve the assets for potential forfeiture in connection with an ongoing criminal…”
Republic of Philippines v. Pimentel (2008) scotus · cites it 2× “Merrill Lynch makes arguments why these actions would not succeed, see Brief for Merrill Lynch as Amicus Curiae 26-27, to which the Republic, the Commission, and the United States respond, see Reply Brief for Petitioners 14-18; Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 24-28.”
$6,871,042.36 and Accrued Interest, in Funds Formerly Held in Account Number 07, at Mtb Bank in New Jersey, Currently on (2016) dcd · cites it 7× “Prior Venus Account Funds Litigation Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2467 In December 2004, a Brazilian court issued a warrant to seize the Venus Account Funds pursuant to an investigation into a “Kesten principal .”
In Re Any & All Funds or Other Assets in Brown Bros. Harriman & Co. (2009) dcd · cites it 10× “” 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(3). The Opportunity Fund (“Fund”), a target of the restraining order sought here, has objected to the government’s application.”
In Re: Trade and Commerce Bank (2018) cadc · cites it 4× “The Second Circuit, noting that 28 U.S.C. § 2467 provides a statutory exception to the penal law rule, remanded the case "to the district court with instructions that it afford Brazil and the Attorney General a reasonable period of time to satisfy § 2467's exception .”
In Re Any and All Funds or Other Assets, in Brown (2010) cadc · cites it 9× “Government seeks a court order under 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(3) to freeze the assets of individuals and entities who are the subjects of an ongoing criminal investigation by the Brazilian government for possible violations of Brazilian law.”
United States v. Opportunity Fund & Tiger Eye Investments, Ltd. (2010) cadc · cites it 9× “Government seeks a court order under 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(3) to freeze the assets of individuals and entities who are the subjects of an ongoing criminal investigation by the Brazilian government for possible violations of Brazilian law.”
United States v. Younes Nasri (2024) ca9 “” 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (d)(1)(A)–(D). We can only imagine how well we would receive a foreign judgment that purported to declare title to property within U.”
In the Matter of an Enforcement of a Restraining Order by the Ninth Federal Court, Fifth Judicial Subsection in Campinas (2024) dcd · cites it 24× “” See United States’ Application to Enforce a Foreign Forfeiture Judgment Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2467 (c)(1) and (d)(1) Against Bahia Emerald and for Entry of an Order of Forfeiture (“Gov’t Appl.”
Show all 27 citing cases →
— 28 U.S.C. § 2467(d)(3) — 2 cases
United States v. Barry Fischer Law Firm, LLC (2024) cadc
Restraint of All Assets Contained or Formerly Contained in Investment Account Numbers at Ubs Financial Services, Inc., H (2012) dcd
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.