39 U.S.C. § 3007
Detention of mail for temporary periods
Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
1999—Pub. L. 106–168 added subsecs. (a) and (b), struck out former subsec. (a) which provided for injunctive relief and other orders by the district court in which the defendant gets his mail, and redesignated former subsec. (b) as (c).
Amendment by Pub. L. 106–168 effective 120 days after
Section effective
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases, 1971–2006 · leading case: United States v. Weingold, 844 F. Supp. 1560 (D.N.J. 1994).
United States v. Weingold, 844 F. Supp. 1560 (D.N.J. 1994). “INTRODUCTION The United States of America and the United States Postal Service have applied to this Court for a preliminary injunction under 39 U.S.C. § 3007 , 18 U.S.C. § 1345 and Fed.”
Dynaquest Corp. v. United States Postal Serv., 242 F.3d 1070 (D.C. Cir. 2001). “1 Eight days later, the Postal Service filed a separate action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. § 3007 , seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction directing the detention of Dynaquest’s mail…”
United States v. William Savran & Assocs., Inc., 755 F. Supp. 1165 (E.D.N.Y 1991). “§ 1345 was “intended to make it easier for the government to obtain preliminary injunctions as a means of terminating fraudulent schemes during the pendency of criminal investigations than had been possible under 39 U.S.C. § 3007” (United States v. Belden, supra, 714 F.”
State Comm'n on Human Relations v. Talbot Cnty. Det. Ctr., 803 A.2d 527 (Md. 2002). “(quoting 39 U.S.C. § 3007 ). The critical difference between the statute in Beamish and the statute before us today is that the Beamish provision spoke directly to the judiciary concerning its authority, or rather its duty, to issue an injunction upon a showing of probable cause.”
United States v. Belden, 714 F. Supp. 42 (N.D.N.Y. 1987). “The Judiciary Committee of the Senate, reporting on the proposed statute providing injunctions against fraud, found that the avenue of preliminary relief provided by 39 U.S.C. § 3007 was too limited because it did not restrict future mailings or schemes that did not directly…”
Francine Marxe v. C.W. Jackson, C.E. Yates, & at & T Commc'ns, Inc., 833 F.2d 1121 (3rd Cir. 1988). “1972) (No irreparable harm showing under 39 U.S.C. § 3007 ). 4 . Courts need not find irreparable harm when acting to protect their jurisdiction.”
Blount v. Rizzi, 400 U.S. 410 (1971). “§ 4007 (now 39 U. S. C. § 3007 ), 84 Stat. 748 , under which the Postmaster General may obtain a court order permitting him to detain the defendant’s incoming mail pending the outcome of § 4006 proceedings against him.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. Delaware Audubon Soc'y v. Texaco Refining & Mktg., Inc., 906 F.2d 934 (3rd Cir. 1990). “2d at 806 (quoting from 39 U.S.C. § 3007 ) (emphasis added). Likewise, in Virgin Islands, the statute in question, the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act of 1978, provided for preliminary injunctive relief upon a “prima facie showing of a violation.”
United States Postal Serv. v. Athena Prods., Ltd., 654 F.2d 362 (5th Cir. 1981). “§ 3005 and 39 U.S.C. § 3007 . Under section 3005 1 the Postal Service may institute administrative proceedings to determine whether money is being obtained through the mails by means of false representations.”
United States v. Outpost Dev. Corp., 369 F. Supp. 399 (C.D. Cal. 1973). “The provisions of 39 U.S.C. § 3007 under which plaintiffs seek relief provide that such injunction may issue where there has been a showing before the court that there is probable cause to believe that 39 U.”
United States Postal Serv. v. Andrew R. Amada Power Pick, Inc., an Arizona Corp., D/B/A Powerpick, 200 F.3d 647 (9th Cir. 2000). “3 The district court granted a preliminary injunction under 39 U.S.C. § 3007 , which states: during the pendency of proceedings under sections 3005 or 3006 of this title, the United States district court in the district in which the defendant receives his mail shall, upon…”
Medicare & Medicaid Guide P 41,325 United States of Am. v. Clyde D. Brown Sharon Brown & Clyde D. Brown, M.D. & Assocs., Inc., 988 F.2d 658 (6th Cir. 1993). “§ 1345 as well as 39 U.S.C. § 3007 (“Detention of mail for temporary periods”).”
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.