United States v. Arun Sharma, 509 F. App'x 381

Sharma appeals district court’s dismissal of his third-party petition contesting forfeiture tied to his parents’ health care fraud plea/assets.
District court issued a preliminary order of forfeiture on Feb 7, 2011, ordering forfeiture of assets and funding of a $1.5 million education trust with conditions that unspent funds be forfeited.
Sharma received actual notice of the order on Mar 3, 2011; he and his sibling settled their third-party claims; educational-trust funding proceeded.
On Jan 12, 2012 the court ordered funding of the trust; on Jan 26, 2012 the Government indicated $1.38 million placed in trust and $120,000 held in the registry.
Sharma filed a Jan 27, 2012 third-party petition seeking an ancillary proceeding; the district court held it untimely under the 30-day window for third-party petitions.
The court reviews third-party-claim rulings de novo and factual findings for clear error; it affirms the district court’s dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of Sharma’s third-party petition	Sharma argues the 30-day period began January 26, 2012	Government asserts the 30-day period began March 3, 2011	Untimely; window began with notice in 2011
Standing to challenge the educational trust terms	Sharma contests trust terms breaches of the plea agreement	District court correctly recognized limitations under the forfeiture provision	Affirmed; standing to challenge denied to extent barred by forfeiture provision

United States v. Marion, 562 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2009) (timeliness of third-party petitions for forfeiture)
United States v. Stone, 304 F. App’x 334 (5th Cir. 2008) (untimely petition extinguishes interests)