Legal Opinion
Acosta v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 12, 2005No. 04-56164; D.C. No. CV-03-06170-RPublished
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Conrado Acosta appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action for return of currency seized. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
We review de novo the district court’s determination that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Stock W. Corp. v. Taylor, 964 F.2d 912, 917 (9th Cir.1992) (en banc). Because Acosta failed to comply with the administrative prerequisites to challenge a forfeiture, the district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. See 19 U.S.C. § 1609; cf.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. $292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, Calvin L. Robinson, Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Dennis Edward EliasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Marshall Leasing, Inc., a Washington Corporation v. United States of America, United States Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Stock West Corporation, an Oregon Corporation v. Michael TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Evaristo Rangel-GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.