United States v. All Funds on Deposit With R.J. O'brien & Associates
982 F. Supp. 2d 830
N.D. Ill.2013Background
- United States filed an in rem forfeiture action seeking roughly $6.7 million in R.J. O’Brien accounts tied to an Al Qaeda affiliate; insurers filed verified claims.
- Funds traceable to Mohammad Qasim al Ghamdi acting for Bridge Investment/Al Qaeda beneficiary Abu Al Tayyeb; OFAC blocked the accounts in 2007.
- Insurance companies registered a NY default judgment against Al Qaeda for about $9.351 billion (final judgment in 2012) and registered it in this district in 2012.
- The dispute interwove with a related enforcement matter transferred from Judge Gettleman to this court; prior orders denied government quash and addressed standing.
- TRIA authorizes execution on blocked assets to satisfy judgments, superseding civil-forfeiture procedures; court held claimants have Article III, statutory, and prudential standing.
- Court granted claimants summary judgment on their enforceable TRIA claim and denied government summary judgment; cases terminated with judgment forms to be submitted by Oct. 31, 2013.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutional standing present? | O’Brien II found standing at filing; injury concrete via possible execution of funds. | Government contends lack of injury or stake at filing. | Claimants had Article III standing when claims were filed. |
| Statutory standing under TRIA? | TRIA's notwithstanding clause overrides Rule G and 983(a)(2)(C)(ii). | TRIA does not override pleading requirements. | TRIA provides statutory standing to assert claims. |
| Sovereign immunity waiver? | TRIA’s notwithstanding clause waives sovereign immunity for execution. | No explicit waiver language required by law. | TRIA sufficiently waives immunity to allow execution. |
| Lien extension validity under Rule 277(f)? | Rule 277(f) extensions valid; lien remains. | Lien expired after 6 months unless extended. | Extensions stayed the six-month limit; lien remains valid. |
| Prior exclusive jurisdiction/in custodia legis? | TRIA supersedes abstention doctrines; related enforcement proper. | Abstention rules should apply; case improper. | TRIA forecloses exclusive-jurisdiction and in-custodia-legis barriers. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. 5 S 351 Tuthill Rd., 233 F.3d 1017 (7th Cir. 2000) (standing requires injury, causation, redressability in forfeiture)
- United States v. Funds in the Amount of $571,810, 719 F.3d 648 (7th Cir. 2013) (pleading standing in forfeiture cases may be satisfied by asserting injury)
- United States v. $196,969.00 in United States Currency, 719 F.3d 644 (7th Cir. 2013) (standing can be established by injury to claimant; need not prove ownership at filing)
- United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer & Co., 772 F. Supp. 2d 191 (D.D.C. 2011) (TRIA not-overridden by other laws; competing authorities considered)
- Citizens Elec. Co. v. Bituminous Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 68 F.3d 1016 (7th Cir. 1995) (notwithstanding clause contextual interpretation; TRIA distinguished)
- Cisneros v. Alpine Ridge Group, 508 U.S. 10 (1993) (notwithstanding clauses interpreted broadly to supersede conflicting laws)