US govt wants couple’s claim to seized $23K cash dismissed

The U.S. government has asked the federal court to dismiss a couple’s claim of ownership to the $23,000 that was seized at the Francisco C. Ada-Saipan International Airport from a hand-carried luggage of a store worker who was bound for Shanghai, China in February last year.

Assistant U.S. attorney Russell H. Lorfing said the claim was not properly sworn to by petitioners Xingnong Xu and his wife, Shaorong Zheng, who claimed they are the innocent owners of the forfeited money at issue.

Lorfing said the petition fails to set forth the time and circumstances of the petitioners’ acquisition of the right, title, and interest in the forfeited money.

The prosecutor also stated that petitioners Xu and Zheng fail to state a claim on which they can recover the money.

Xu and Zheng, through counsel Samuel I. Mok, in their petition said they did not know that Delin Ma, who actually transported the money would fail to report the currency on a FinCen Form 105 as required by law.

Mok said the couple collectively earned the money from their joint savings from their long-time employment as managers at LN Market and Blue Sky Market.

Mok said the $20,000 was intended for the couple’s son’s living expenses and tuition payment for a private school, and Xu’s mother for Chinese New Year celebration.

Mok said $3,000 was for personal loan to Ma.

Mok asked the U.S. District Court for the NMI to return to the couple the seized $23,000.

A federal grand jury indicted Ma with one count of bulk cash smuggling out of the United States.

Under the currency reporting laws, a person is required to report any amount of currency $10,000 and over when traveling out of or into the U.S.

Ma pleaded guilty.

Attorney Mark Hanson, counsel for Ma, said the defendant was stopped at the Saipan airport on his way back to China for his son’s wedding.

In December 2015, the court imposed a 36-month probation sentence on the 52-year-old Ma. The court forfeited the $23,000 seized from Ma.

The court also ordered the return to Ma the $3,294 that he was carrying on his person at the time of his arrest.

In the U.S. government’s motion to dismiss, Lorfing said in no way do petitioners provide the time and circumstances of their acquisition of their legal interest in the forfeited money in a way that would allow the court to determine if they have a claim for which relief could be granted.

“We are left to ponder whether the $23,000 claimed by petitioners was earned over a 12-month period or a 10-year time span,” Lorfing said.

Lorfing said petitioners have not stated a proper basis for recovery of the money.

He said to avoid wasting considerable judicial resources in conducting discovery on matters not in dispute, and to allow the parties to focus their resources on the issues that truly matter with respect to petitioners’ theory of recover, the court must hold petitioners accountable for their failure to state a legal basis for recovery.

In Xu’s and Zheng’s petition for return of the seized property filed on Monday, Mok said at the time of the seizure, Ma was a full-time employee of LN Market.

Mok said Ma is Zheng’s distant relative.