Case Information
‐ cv In re
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER
R ULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT . C ITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER J ANUARY IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY F EDERAL R ULE OF A PPELLATE P ROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT S L OCAL R ULE 32.1.1. W HEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE F EDERAL A PPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE ( WITH THE NOTATION SUMMARY ORDER ʺ ). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL .
At stated term of United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit, held at Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, Foley Square, City York, on th day of December, two thousand sixteen. PRESENT: JOHN M. WALKER, JR.,
ROBERT D. SACK,
DENNY CHIN,
Circuit Judges .
‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ x cv
FIONA HAVLISH, individually on behalf
Estate Donald G. Havlish, Jr., et al. STEVEN M.
GREENBAUM, ALAN D. HAYMAN, SHIRLEE
HAYMAN, RENAY FRYM, STUART E. HERSH,
ABRAHAM MENDELSON, DANIEL MILLER,
ELANA ROZENMAN, NOAM ROZENMAN, TZVI
ROZENMAN, DEBORAH RUBIN, JENNY RUBIN,
DANIEL MILLER, CARLOS ACOSTA, MARIA
ACOSTA, TOVA ETTINGER, IRVING FRANKLIN,
BARUCH KAHANE, LIBBY KAHANE, NORMAN
KAHANE, ETHEL J. GRIFFIN, CIPORAH KAPLAN,
ANNA BEER, HARRY BEER, on his own behalf
Administrator Estate Alan Beer, ESTELLE
CARROLL, PHYLLIS MAISEL, JASON
KIRSCHENBAUM, ISABELLE KIRSCHENBAUM,
her own behalf Executrix Estate Martin
Kirschenbaum, JOSHUA KIRSCHENBAUM, DAVID
KIRSCHENBAUM, DANIELLE TEITLEBAUM,
Plaintiffs ‐ Appellees ,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff Counter ‐ Defendant ‐ Appellee ,
v.
EDWENA R. HEGNA, Executrix Estate Paul
B. Hegna, CRAIG H. HEGNA, LYNN M. HEGNA
MOORE, PAUL B. HEGNA, STEVEN A. HEGNA,
Claimants Appellants
DEBORAH D. PETERSON, Personal Representative,
WILLIAM R. HIGGINS, Higgins, et al. HAVLISH
PLAINTIFFS, RUTH ANN BLAND, FATEMEH
BAYANI, her Individual Capacity, BANAFSHEH
BAYANI, her Individual Capacity
Representative Estate Siavash Bayani, BABAK
BAYANI, his Individual Capacity, ESTATE OF
MICHAEL HEISER, ESTATE OF MILLARD D.
CAMPBELL, GARY HEISER, FRANCIS HEISER,
ESTATE OF LELAND TIMOTHY HAUN, IBIS S.
HAUN, MILAGRITOS PEREZ DALIS, SENATOR
HAUN, ESTATE OF JUSTIN R. WOOD, RICHARD
WOOD, KATHLEEN M. WOOD, SHAWN M. WOOD,
ESTATE OF EARL F. CARTRETTE, JR., DENISE M.
EICHSTAEDT, ANTHONY W. CARTRETTE, LEWIS
W. CARTRETTE, ESTATE OF BRIAN MCVEIGH,
SANDRA M. WETMORE, JAMES V. WETMORE,
ESTATE OF MILLARD D. CAMPBELL, MARIE R.
CAMPBELL, BESSIE A. CAMPBELL, ESTATE OF
KEVIN J. JOHNSON, SHYRL L. JOHNSON, CHE G.
COLSON, KEVIN JOHNSON, NICHOLAS A.
JOHNSON, minor, his legal guardian, SHYRL L.
JOHNSON, LAURA E. JOHNSON, BRUCE
JOHNSON, ESTATE OF JOSEPH E. RIMKUS,
BRIDGET BROOKS, JAMES R. RIMKUS, ANNE M.
RIMKUS, ESTATE OF BRENT E. MARTHALER,
KATIE L. MARTHALER, SHARON MARTHALER,
HERMAN C. MARTHALER, III, MATTHEW
MARTHALER, KIRK MARTHALER, ESTATE OF
THANH VAN NGUYEN, CHRISTOPHER R.
NGUYEN, ESTATE OF JOSHUA E. WOODY, DAWN
WOODY, BERNADINE R. BEEKMAN, GEORGE M.
BEEKMAN, TRACY M. SMITH, JONICA L. WOODY,
TIMOTHY WOODY, ESTATE OF PETER J.
MORGERA, MICHAEL MORGERA, THOMAS
MORGERA, ESTATE OF KENDALL KITSON, JR.,
NANCY R. KITSON, KENDALL K. KITSON, STEVE
K. KITSON, NANCY A. KITSON, ESTATE OF
CHRISTOPHER ADAMS, CATHERINE ADAMS,
JOHN E. ADAMS, PATRICK D. ADAMS, MICHAEL
T. ADAMS, DANIEL ADAMS, MARY YOUNG,
ELIZABETH WOLF, WILLIAM ADAMS, ESTATE OF
CHRISTOPHER LESTER, deceased, CECIL H.
LESTER, JUDY LESTER, CECIL H. LESTER, JR.,
JESSICA F. LESTER, ESTATE OF JEREMY A.
TAYLOR, deceased, LAWRENCE E. TAYLOR,
VICKIE L. TAYLOR, STARLINA D. TAYLOR,
ESTATE OF PATRICK P. FENNIG, deceased,
THADDEUS C. FENNIG, CATHERINE FENNIG,
PAUL D. FENNIG, MARK FENNIG, FIFTH
AVENUE COMPANY, ALAVI FOUNDATION,
Claimants Appellees
SOHRAB VAHABZADEH, DJHANBANI FAMILY
MEMBERS, KHOSROWSHAHI FAMILY MEMBERS,
KHOSHKISH FAMILY MEMBERS,
Claimants
ALL RIGHT, TITLE, AND INTEREST OF ASSA
CORPORATION, ASSA COMPANY LIMITED, BANK
MELLI IRAN IN FIFTH AVENUE COMPANY,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE REAL
ESTATE PROPERTY AND APPURTENANCES
LOCATED AT FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK,
NEW YORK, WITH ALL IMPROVEMENTS AND
ATTACHMENTS THEREON, ALL FUNDS
FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT AT CITIBANK, N.A., NEW
YORK, NEW YORK, IN ACCOUNT NUMBER IN THE NAME OF ASSA CORPORATION
AND ALL FUNDS TRACEABLE THERETO, ALL
FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT AT CITIBANK,
N.A., NEW YORK, NEW YORK, IN ACCOUNT
NUMBER 888165552, IN THE NAME OF ASSA
CORPORATION AND ALL FUNDS TRACEABLE
THERETO, ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT
AT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., BATON
ROUGE, LOUISIANA, IN ACCOUNT NUMBER
2724409590, IN THE NAME OF ASSA
CORPORATION, AND ALL FUNDS TRACEABLE
THERETO, ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT
AT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., BATON
ROUGE, LOUISIANA, IN ACCOUNT NUMBER IN THE NAME OF ASSA
CORPORATION, AND ALL FUNDS TRACEABLE
THERETO, ASSA CORP., 650 FIFTH AVENUE
COMPANY, ALAVI FOUNDATION, ASSA
CORPORATION, ASSA COMPANY LIMITED,
ALAVI FOUNDATION OF NEW YORK, ALL RIGHT
TITLE AND INTEREST IN 650 FIFTH AVENUE, ALL
RIGHT TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE REAL
PROPERTY AND APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT
650 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK WITH
ALL IMPROVEMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS
THEREON, ALL RIGHT TITILE AND INTEREST IN
2313 SOUTH VOSS ROAD, ALL RIGHT, TITLE AND
INTEREST IN THE REAL PROPERTY AND
APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT SOUTH
VOSS ROAD, HOUSTON, TEXAS WITH ALL
IMPROVEMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS
THEREON, ALL RIGHT TITLE AND INTEREST IN QUEENS BOULEVARD, ALL RIGHT, TITLE
AND INTEREST IN THE REAL PROPERTY AND
APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT QUEENS
BOULEVARD, QUEENS, NEW YORK BLOCK LOTS 1,6,7 AND WITH ALL IMPROVEMENTS
AND ATTACHMENTS THEREON, ALL RIGHT,
TITLE AND INTEREST IN MARCONI AVENUE,
ALL RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE REAL
PROPERTY AND APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT MARCONI AVENUE, CARMICHAEL,
CALIFORNIA 95608, WITH ALL IMPROVEMENTS
AND ATTACHMENTS THEREON, ALL RIGHT,
TITLE AND INTEREST IN 4204 ALDIE ROAD, ALL
RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE REAL
PROPERTY AND APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT
4204 ALDIE ROAD, CATHARPIN, VIRGINIA
201431133 WITH ALL IMPROVEMENTS AND
ATTACHMENTS THEREON, ALL RIGHT, TITLE,
AND INTEREST IN 4300 ALDIE ROAD, ALL RIGHT,
TITLE, AND INTEREST IN THE REAL PROPERTY
AND APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT ALDIE
ROAD, CATHARPIN, VIRGINIA 201431133, ALL
RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN MONTROSE
ROAD, ALL RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE
REAL PROPERTY AND APPURTENANCES
LOCATED AT MONTROSE ROAD,
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20854, WITH ALL
IMPROVEMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS
THEREON, ALL RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN JEB STUART ROAD, ALL RIGHT, TITLE AND
INTEREST IN THE REAL PROPERTY AND
APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT JEB STUART
ROAD, ROCKVILLE MARYLAND WITH ALL
IMPROVEMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS
THEREON, ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT
AT CITIBANK, N.A., ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON
DEPOSIT IN ACCOUNT NUMBER AT
CITIBANK, N.A., NEW YORK, NEW YORK, ALL
FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT AT CITIBANK,
N.A., ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT IN
ACCOUNT NUMBER AT CITIBANK,
N.A., NEW YORK, NEW YORK, ALL FUNDS
FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT AT JPMORGAN CHASE
BANK, N.A., ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT
IN ACCOUNT NUMBER AT
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., BATON ROUGE,
LOUISIANA, ALL FUNDS FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT
AT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., ALL FUNDS
FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT IN ACCOUNT NUMBER AT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA, ALL FUNDS ON
DEPOSIT AT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., ALL
FUNDS ON DEPOSIT AT JPMORGAN CHASE
BANK, N.A., IN ACCOUNT NUMBER
HELD IN THE NAME OF FIFTH AVENUE
COMPANY, AND ALL FUNDS TRACEABLE
THERETO, ALL FUNDS ON DEPOSIT AT
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., IN ACCOUNT
NUMBER HELD IN THE NAME OF
FIFTH AVENUE COMPANY AND ALL FUNDS
TRACEABLE THERETO, ALL FUNDS ON DEPOSIT
AT JPMORGAN CHASE B, ALL FUNDS ON
DEPOSIT AT STERLING NATIONAL BANK, ALL
FUNDS ON DEPOSIT AT STERLING NATIONAL
BANK IN ACCOUNT NUMBER HELD IN
THE NAME OF ALAVI FOUNDATION AND ALL
FUNDS TRACEABLE THERETO, ALL FUNDS ON
DEPOSIT AT STERLING NATIONAL BANK, ALL
FUNDS ON DEPOSIT AT STERLING NATIONAL
BANK IN ACCOUNT NUMBER HELD IN
THE NAME OF ALAVI FOUNDATION AND ALL
FUNDS TRACEABLE THERETO, ALL FUNDS ON
DEPOSIT AT STERLING NATIONAL BANK, ALL
FUNDS ON DEPOSIT AT STERLING NATIONAL
BANK IN ACCOUNT NUMBER HELD IN
THE NAME OF ALAVI FOUNDATION AND ALL
FUNDS TRACEABLE THERETO,
Defendants ‐ ‐ Rem . [*]
‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ x
FOR CLAIMANTS APPELLANTS: RALPH PAUL DUPONT (Barbara J. Dupont,
on brief ), The Dupont Law Firm, Stamford, Connecticut.
FOR PLAINTIFF COUNTER ‐ MARTIN S. BELL, Assistant United States DEFENDANT APPELLEE Attorney (Michael D. Lockard, Anna M. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Skotko, Assistant United States Attorneys, brief ), Preet Bharara, United States
Attorney Southern District New York, York, New York.
*7 FOR CLAIMANTS ‐ APPELLEES MELISSA R. GINSBERG (Daniel S. Ruzumna, ALAVI FOUNDATION AND on brief ), Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler FIFTH AVE. CO.: LLP, New York, New York.
FOR PLAINTIFFS APPELLEES PATRICK N. PETROCELLI (Curtis C. STEVEN M. GREENBAUM, et al. , Mechling, James L. Bernard, Nathan H. CARLOS ACOSTA, et al. ANNA Stopper, Pamela S. Takefman, brief ), BEER, et al. AND JASON Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, New York, KIRSCHENBAUM, et al. : New York.
Appeal from United States District Court for Southern District New York (Forrest, J. ).
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,
ADJUDGED, AND DECREED judgment district court is AFFIRMED and appeal otherwise DISMISSED .
Claimants appellants Edwena R. Hegna, executrix estate Paul B. Hegna, Steven A. Hegna, Craig H. Hegna, and Lynn Marie Hegna Moore (together, ʺ Hegna Parties ʺ ) appeal from judgment district court entered August pursuant to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 54(b), granting ʹ s motion to strike summary Hegna Parties ʹ innocent owner defenses and denying Hegna Parties ʹ motion summary judgment. The district court explained its reasoning opinion order filed May 2014. The government, claimants appellees Alavi Foundation ( Alavi ʺ ) *8 Company ( ʺ 650 Co. ʺ ), and the Greenbaum, Acosta, Beer, Kirschenbaum, and certain other groups of judgment creditors, also claimants appellees, oppose the appeal. [2] We assume the parties ʹ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues appeal.
The Hegna Parties hold a judgment from United States District Court for District of Columbia against Iran and Iranian Ministry of Information and Security ( ʺ MOIS ʺ ), arising out of Iran and MOIS default in action relating to terrorist attack killed Charles Hegna. The judgment, entered February 7, 2002, provided $42 million in compensatory damages against Iran and MOIS, and $333 million in punitive damages against MOIS alone. On November 27, 2002, Hegna Parties registered judgment in Southern District of York. The remaining unpaid amount approximately $33,618,878.86. [3]
On December 17, 2008, filed this civil forfeiture action in below seeking property owned by Assa Corporation, Assa Company Limited (together, ʺ Assa ʺ ), and Bank Melli Iran ( ʺ Bank Melli ʺ ), alleging *9 violations of International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. , and 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956 and 1957. By amended complaint filed November 12, 2009, government added properties held by Alavi and 650 Fifth Avenue Co. defendants in rem . The government seeks of interests of Assa, Bank Melli, Alavi, and 650 Fifth Avenue Co. in a 36 story office building located at 650 Fifth Avenue in Manhattan (the ʺ Building ʺ ), other real properties several states, and contents of several bank accounts (collectively, ʺ defendant properties ). The parties do not dispute that Building owned by Fifth Avenue Co., a partnership between Alavi, York profit organization, and Assa. The government also alleges two Assa entities are shell companies controlled by Bank Melli, bank owned and controlled Iran.
On September 16, April 18, 2014, district court granted summary judgment, inter alia favor government, forfeiting Assa, Alavi, Fifth Avenue Co. ʹ s interests defendant properties. district court entered final these orders at request Alavi Fifth Co., who timely appealed. On July we vacated ʹ s after concluding record contained disputes fact regarding Alavi ʹ s knowledge Bank Melli Iran ownership Assa. In re Ave. & Related Properties F.3d (2d Cir. 2016).
Meanwhile, had filed notices this action below claiming right satisfy outstanding from proceeds Sale *10 of all right, title, and interest of [Assa and Bank Melli] in 650 Fifth Avenue Company. ʺ The Hegna Parties assert that they are innocent owners and bona fide purchasers for value of Assa and Bank Melli ʹ s assets within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 983(d)(2)(A)(i) and (d)(3)(A)(i) ‐ (ii). [4]
The Hegna Parties filed a motion for summary judgment on their claims, which became fully briefed on March 3, 2014, arguing that they were innocent owners of the Building because they purportedly had obtained a judgment lien on all of Iran real property in New York County. [5] The opposed the motion and moved to strike the Hegna Parties ʹ innocent owner defenses or, in the alternative, for summary *11 judgment. Alavi, Co., and several groups judgment creditor plaintiffs also opposed the Hegna Parties ʹ motion.
On May the district court issued an opinion and order denying the Hegna Parties ʹ motion and granting the motion strike for summary judgment the Hegna Parties ʹ innocent owner defenses. The district court held that Hegna Parties did not qualify innocent owners the building because they lacked an ownership interest Building. In so holding, district court noted (1) Hegna Parties held judgments against Iran MOIS, who were not record owners Building, (2) Hegna Parties claimed interest only personal property, against which their could not create a lien, (3) any lien they once held had expired. The district court further concluded that, even if Hegna Parties did hold valid ownership interest Building, they could not avail themselves innocent owner defense because any property interest they held did predate illegal activity giving rise forfeiture they did not acquire any interest Building bona fide purchasers for value.
After district court denied Hegna Parties ʹ motion for reconsideration its decision, Hegna Parties filed motion entry final pursuant Federal Rule Civil Procedure 54(b), requesting district court certify innocent owner defenses immediate appeal. ʺ App. at 382. granted motion, they timely appealed.
We review a ʹ grant of summary judgment de novo resolv[ing] all ambiguities draw[ing] all inferences against the moving party. ʺ Garcia curiam). (per 2013) Cir. (2d ʺ t, Dep Police Hartford v. F.3d Summary is proper only when, construing evidence the light most favorable to non movant, ʹ there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact movant is entitled to as a matter of law. ʹʺ Doninger v. Niehoff, F.3d (2d Cir. 2011) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a)).
If a claimant a civil forfeiture can show that it is an innocent owner of property to be seized, that property will not be forfeited. U.S.C. § 983(d)(1). claimant must prove it is an innocent owner by a preponderance evidence. Id. For purposes innocent owner defense, an owner is ʺ a person with an ownership interest specific property sought to be forfeited, including a leasehold, lien, mortgage, recorded security interest, or valid assignment an ownership interest ʺ not, inter alia a ʺ person with only a general unsecured interest in, or claim against, property estate another. ʺ Id. § 983(d)(6).
Section 983(d) classifies innocent owners whether their property interest was existence when illegal conduct giving rise took place. If interest already existed, a claimant qualifies innocent owner if claimant was unaware conduct or, upon learning conduct giving rise *13 forfeiture, did all that reasonably could be expected under the circumstances to terminate such use the property. ʺ Id. § 983(d)(2)(A). If the property interest was acquired after the illegal conduct took place, the claimant must have been a ʺ bona fide purchaser or seller for value ʺ who ʺ did not know was reasonably without cause believe that property was subject forfeiture. ʺ Id. § 983(d)(3)(A).
On appeal, Hegna Parties argue principally that their against Iran MOIS functions as a lien against Building. That judgment, however, is not against 650 Fifth Co., entity that owns Building; thus, it does create a legal interest in Building. See United States v. Ribadeneira 105 F.3d 836 (2d Cir. 1997) ( ʺ [A]n interest ʹ in property must be an interest in a particular, specific asset, as opposed a general interest entire forfeited estate account. ). Hegna Parties cite no authority for claim that Ave. Co. partnership is ignored under New York partnership law ʺ such that Hegna Parties ʹ lien would attach Assa Alavi interests Building. Appellants ʹ Br. at 11. Because Hegna Parties lack a specific property interest defendant properties, they are general creditors who cannot be owners purposes innocent owner statute. U.S.C. § 983(d)(6)(B)(i).
Furthermore, any ownership interest that Hegna Parties once held has since expired under York law. See N.Y. C.P.L.R. 5203(a) (explaining that *14 judgment lien is effective until ten years after filing of the judgment roll ). As noted above, there is no evidence this record suggesting that the Hegna Parties ever sought renewal under the mechanism outlined in N.Y. C.P.L.R. 5014(3), which permits judgment creditors to apply for renewal of their judgment liens in the year prior to expiration the ten years. Hegna Parties ʹ argument that the post complaint protective order in the forfeiture action extends somehow excuses the expiry their lien is baseless.
Finally, the Hegna Parties appeal the district court ʹ s approval settlement agreement between the government several groups creditors, which provides pro rata distribution proceeds to creditors who are parties to agreement from any defendant properties are ultimately forfeited civil action. Because Hegna Parties did not challenge settlement agreement district court, this argument is waived. Millea v. Metro N. R.R. Co. F.3d (2d Cir. 2011). Moreover, we lack appellate jurisdiction consider 54(b) Rule s ʹ court district covered not is it argument judgment.
We have considered all Hegna Parties remaining arguments find them be without merit. Accordingly, reasons stated above, we AFFIRM certified this court pursuant Federal Rule Civil Procedure 54(b) DISMISS remainder appeal.
FOR THE COURT: Catherine O Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
[*] Clerk Court directed amend official caption shown above.
[1] Hegna Parties also appeal from district court October opinion order denying motion extend their purported lien under York Civil Practice Law Rules § 5203(b). Because did enter final October order, we lack appellate jurisdiction over aspect appeal.
[2] The Greenbaum, Acosta, Beer, and Kirschenbaum creditors filed brief opposition Hegna Parties opening brief, which Rubin, Heiser, Bland, Peterson, Havlish, and Bayani creditors join whole or part.
[3] On March 20, 2003, Hegna Parties applied United States Department Treasury payment under Victims Trafficking Violence Protection Act, Pub. L. No. Stat. 1464, amended section Terrorism Risk Insurance Act Pub. L. No. Stat. 2322. Hegna received $8,381,121.14 from Office Foreign Assets Control and, condition receiving payment, relinquished all rights claims punitive damages awarded connection with claim claims [the Parties] brought under U.S.C. [§] 1605(a)(7) any related interest, costs, attorneys fees.
[4] The Hegna Parties took additional steps to enforce and satisfy their judgment outside of the civil forfeiture proceeding. On December 29, 2008, the Hegna Parties obtained a Writ of Execution from the Clerk of Court for the Southern District of York for goods and chattels Islamic Republic Iran, its agencies and instrumentalities, including, but not limited to, Bank Melli Iran, Assa Corporation and/or Assa Co Limited (entities owned or controlled, directly or indirectly Iran) and/or one Mohammad Hassan Dehghani Tafti. ʺ The writs were delivered to U.S. Marshal Service for service on Assa, Alavi, and Fifth Avenue Co. on December 30, 2008. Separately, on March 27, 2009, Hegna Parties sought order to show cause district court turnover and sale Building to satisfy their judgment against Iran and MOIS. Other private creditors Iran have also filed individual turnover actions against Assa, Alavi, Fifth Avenue Co. seeking attachment turnover their properties to satisfy creditors outstanding judgments. The turnover actions, which have been consolidated with action district court, generally allege Assa, Alavi, Co. are sufficiently related to Iran to render their property subject turnover pursuant to Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ( ʺ FISA ʺ ) Terrorism Risk Insurance Act ( TRIA ʺ ). Hegna Parties also appeal from several non final orders entered their turnover action; we dispose appeal separate summary order filed today. See Hegna v. Islamic Republic Iran cv.
[5] At time filed their motion, they had attempted extend renew their lien. They subsequently filed motion extend lien on August after district court had denied motion summary on their innocent owner defenses; denied motion extend lien October 2014.
[6] Because we conclude there are no material fact disputes entitled matter law innocent owner defenses, we do separately consider claims under standard motion strike.
[7] To extent assert they are innocent owners unidentified personal property held Alavi Assa result writs execution served December argument has been waived it raised first time appeal. Millea v. Metro N. R.R. Co. F.3d (2d Cir. 2011).
[8] In contesting settlement agreement, argue their claims under Terrorism Risk Insurance Act take priority over claims, an argument they also make appeal turnover action. We also lack jurisdiction consider this argument it has never been presented subject appealable order.