Defendants.
OCT-3
Clerk, US Dishicx
COl7RT 461
Summary: Petitioner, the sole individual owner of the property in question (described by the FBI
as "2000 Year Old Era Mosaic of Hercules") hereinafter referred to as the "Mosaic", has filed
this action for the return of the same. He imported the property, paid customs duties, and then one
item, a Greek Mosaic,(which was close to trash and in need of restoration) was restored to value
by the Petitioner. Upon its restoration the Defendant FBI raided his home and seized all items
listed on a Search and Seizure Warrant. The Petitioner filed all necessary claims of ownership
and release of all properties only one of which (the Mosaic) did the FBI give an identification
1
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 2 of 84 Page ID #:124
3410160067. The FBI denied the claims of ownership and for release. The FBI has not responded
to Petitioner's written legal memorandum demonstrating that there were no grounds for them to
hold the seized properties. It was demonstrated that all customs duties were paid and that the
importation of the seized property was legal. The FBI has stated that this petition must be filed in
federal court as the next stage to force them to acknowledge Petitioner's ownership and to have
them release Petitioner's unlawfully seized property. Petitioner is a chemical engineer by
education. He has two businesses, restoring antiquities, buying rehabbing and selling cars, and
working in a printing supply company as technical engineer. He had a patent at age of 23while he
was still in Syria. He had to leave his country, because of the abuse he received from certain of
his professors and colleagues who were envious of his brilliance. In addition, he had threats from
certain government officials, because he spoke up for his rights. Now in America he finds
Islamophobia and racism, because Petitioner has discerned a way of restoring value to disheveled
antiquities. No wonder the Congressman Steve King (speaking at the Republican national
convention on July 18th, 2016) stated that whites are the only ones who have contributed to the
development of civilization. That kind of ignorance has been displayed in this case. Whites have
consistently denied "others" the opportunity to gain an accretion to wealth on their ingenuity and
brilliance. This unlawful search and seizure is an example.
PARTIES
owner of all the seized property described in detail herein which is the subject of this complaint,
including but not limited to a Greek Mosaic, known as the 11~' Trial of Hercules, which he
imported as trash and restored to value spending over $40,000 for the technique of restoration and
preservation. Petitioner wants his property returned released and returned to him as the proper
and sole owner of all of said property described in the Search and Seizure Warrant attached
hereto as
Exhibit A.
2. The United States government is the sovereign nation from which the Department
of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation derive their power and authority to engage in
investigations, searches and seizures, forfeiture proceedings and other civil and criminal litigation
the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") and the largest investigative agency in the federal
government.
2
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 3 of 84 Page ID #:125
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981 and 2323. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
5. Venue is proper in this District under 18 U.S.C. § 983(~(3)(A) because the seizure
warrants for the subject domain names were issued in this district.
6. The Greek Mosaic is the most valuable item in the list of property seized and
sought to be returned to the Petitioner. It is the only item for which the FBI gave an identification
number as indicated in the Summary. The Mosaic, popularly described in the antiquities industry
as "The Eleventh Labor of Hercules" is a famous Mosaic in the history of Greek mythology. It
other display venue. Petitioner paid for the importation of the Mosaic and all the other items on
the list. Some items, however, were computers and records which were not related to importation
ofthe
Mosaic, but they were still seized by the government. Unfortunately, this action has destroyed
Petitioner's business of restoring items and conserving items which he legally acquires.
7. The Petitioner paid all customs duties and other charges for the importation of his
property including the Mosaic. Petitioner paid a specialist in New York to come to California to
restore the Mosaic to turn it from an item of low value close to trash now it is transformed to a
Seizure Warrant for the location 36811 45th St, East Palmdale, California, Petitioner's home. On
Marchl9th 2016 at about Spm the FBI raided that location which is the home of Petitioner. The
government seized the subject properties including the Mosaic pursuant to forfeiture statutes
3
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 4 of 84 Page ID #:126
listed in the search and seizure warrant. A copy of the warrant is attached to the Declaration of
the Petitioner in Support of Petitioner's Petition for Release of Seized Property ("A1Charihi
Declaration") as Exhibit A.
which was not attached to the warrant or the receipt for property given to the Petitioner. This is a
violation because with this failure to provide an affidavit(or recorded testimony) the Petitioner is
not able to examine what the judge reviewed in order to suggest that there was probable cause
sufficient to issue the warrant. The Petitioner suggests that until the government can submit an
affidavit or recorded testimony to establish probable cause for this search and seizure, the search
and seizure were unlawful and all items, the Mosaic and every other item seized must be returned
to Petitioner, forthwith. No affidavit has been submitted to Petitioner which provides facts or
federal statutes that show that there was probable cause for a search and seizure.
10. Petitioner was not notified of the seizure, until he was called by the neighbors that
the FBI had entered his home and garage when they knew he was away at a family gathering in a
different town, and they further knew no one was in the house. He was alerted to the fact that
they were in his home and garage ransacking his place based on a warrant for search and seizure
which they possessed. He called the FBI and was asked on the phone by the FBI to come home,
which he did. He was mistreated. The FBI was ranting and raving asking him many questions,
without giving him time to answer a question. They were not cordial and respectful. They were
nasty, intimidating, and threatening. They did not tell him why they were there nor showed him
the warrant when he asked them to show until the moment they left with the seized items.
10. On May 20, 2016, counsel for the Petitioner forwazded a Legal Memorandum
Exhibit B to the FBI showing in detail based on the facts and the case law that they had made a
4
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 5 of 84 Page ID #:127
mistake and that Islamophobia and racism was the only basis for the search and seizure by the
FBI.
The Legal Memorandum requested return of all the seized property. Petitioner's Decl., Exhibit
A.
11. Since June 2016, Petitioner has undertaken substantial efforts to petition for the
return of the subject Mosaic and other properties, including making calls to FBI and the USAO,
and raising the issues with them that were covered in the Legal Memorandum Exhibit B. The
Petitioner filed a request for return of the Mosaic on June 6,2016 and for all items seized with the
12. Petitioner is incurring substantial hardship due to the government's seizure of the
subject Mosaic and other property and its failure to initiate formal forfeiture proceedings or take
action on Petitioner's request for return of the Mosaic and other subject property. In particular,
Petitioner needs to perform further restoration on the Mosaic and the FBI is unskilled,
inexperienced and abysmally careless when it comes to preserving antiquities such as the Mosaic,
other antiquities and properties, including but not limited to statues, and antiquities that need
restoration and conversation. This seizure in addition is causing a loss of goodwill and the risk of
permanently losing the interest of potential buyers of the Mosaic and other properties, and
13. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-12 ofthe Petition
14. Petitioner filed a claim of ownership for the Mosaic and another separate claim of
ownership for the other items. Petitioner filed a request to release the Mosaic and another request
5
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 6 of 84 Page ID #:128
for release ofthe other properties. These requests were made to the United States of America and
15. Immediate return of the subject Mosaic and other properties is warranted because
at least 15 days has passed (in fact 70days have passed) since Petitioner requested return ofthe
property from the appropriate FBI officials, and because all ofthe conditions set forth in 18
U.S.C.
16. Petitioner is the lawful owner of the Mosaic and subject properties and therefore
17. The subject Mosaic will be harmed if it remains under the control of the FBI and
there is a real risk of damage to the Mosaic as set forth in herein. There are further treatments,
restoration and conservation techniques that should be done to the Mosaic, thus there is a risk that
the Mosaic will be disintegrated and therefore will not be available at the time of any eventual
trial. This is tangible property, which requires care and maintenance which does play a role in
assuring the availability of the Mosaic at trial, as there is some real risk that the Mosaic and
subject property can be disintegrated, destroyed, or otherwise made unavailable by the FBI for
18. The continued possession by the government pending the final disposition of
forfeiture proceedings will cause Petitioner substantial hardship, including but not limited to,
effectively preventing the continued restoration and conservation of the Mosaic. Negligently or
carelessly destroying the subject Mosaic of the Petitioner is depriving him of lawful business.
19. The continued possession of the subject Mosaic and other property will
substantially and irreparably harm the goodwill of the Petitioner's business and drive its
customers away, including by preventing potential buyers from viewing the Mosaic and
Petitioner's First Amendment rights, and Petitioner will continue to suffer a deprivation of his
First
Amendment rights if the property is not immediately returned. The Mosaic makes a certain
statement about Greek Mythology which is muffled and stifled by the illegal seizure ofthe
Mosaic and the continued refusal to return such property for display to the public.
21. The hardship to Petitioner (and to the property) substantially outweighs risk that
the subject Mosaic and other property will be destroyed, lost, concealed, or transferred. Such
destruction, loss, concealment or transfer would be counterproductive and against the self-interest
of Petitioner. The government's seizure of the subject Mosaic and other property has and will
continue to impose a substantial financial hardship on Petitioner and will continue to violate
Petitioner's First Amendment rights. These hardships far outweigh the risk that the subject
Mosaic and other properties will be destroyed, lost, concealed, or transferred, for the simple
22. None of the conditions set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 983(fl(8) is present, as set forth in
23. The government has not contended that the subject Mosaic and other properties
a.re contraband.
24. The USAO in the District stated in a phone conversation that a criminal
investigation is under way, but to this date the USAO has not alleged that any activity of
Petitioner is criminal. The Legal Memorandum Exhibit B. that was submitted to the
government has not been responded to, rebutted or refuted, but the FBI still holds the seized items
as if there has been either improper civil or criminal activity. The plethora of documents attached
to the Claim of Ownership for the Mosaic and the Claim of Ownership for the other property
delineates every step of the international import transaction that brought all those items including
the seized mosaic to the states including payment of customs duties. Even to the extent the
government believes the seized property will be needed as evidence, they will remain just as
7
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 8 of 84 Page ID #:130
available as evidence even if returned to Petitioner. The mosaic still requires restoration and
conservation which the FBI is not performing and will not perform.
25. The subject Mosaic is not "particularly suited" for illegal activities, it is simply an
antiquity in need of restoration and conservation which the Petitioner is performing and the FBI
is not performing..
26. The government has not shown and cannot show that the Mosaic and other seized
property ever was used to commit a criminal act, much less that it will be used or such in the
future. By performing restoration and conservation on the Mosaic the Petitioner is not
committing any civil impropriety, let alone criminal activity that the government has been unable
27. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-26 ofthe Petition as if
28. The 14~' Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits the taking of property
"Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce
any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall
any state deprive any person of life, libe►ty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
29. Petitioner is naturalized citizen of the United States and it is well settled in federal case
law that the state referred to in the 14t" Amendment also applies to the US government
itself.
0
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 9 of 84 Page ID #:131
The US government cannot take a citizen's property without due process of law, just as
no state may take a citizen's property without due process of law. The FBI and the
Department of Justice has taken the property of Petitioner without due process of law.
Said property should be returned to Petitioner in order to remedy this violation of the 14~'
United States.
WHEREFORE,Petitioner prays,
A. That this Court direct the United States of America and Department of
Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to effectuate the immediate return of the
Mosaic and other seized property to Petitioner by delivering the Mosaic and other seized
property to the home and garage of Petitioner from where they were seized.
B. That the Court set a hearing on this Petition at the earliest date convenient
for the Court's calendar, and preferably no later than October 7th, 2016, and further that
the Court direct that the government's opposition papers, if any, be filed no later than
C. That the Court allow amicus submissions on or before October 11th, 2016
Respectfully submitted, /
/s/Mohamad AlCharihi
Dated: September 21, 2016 By Mohamad A1Charihi, Petitioner, pro se
E
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 10 of 84 Page ID #:132
ATTACF3MENT A
PREMISES TO BE SEARCHED
T he SUBJECT PREMISES
is a single family reside
nce located
at 36811 45Th Street East,
Palmdale, California, 935
52. The
SUBJECT PREMISES is a two
-story single family reside
nce, with
blue siding and a darker
blue trim, and white pane
windows.
There are two white column
s at the front of the hou
se. The
front door is white. The
attached garage has a whi
te door with
glass panes. The curb in
front of the house display
the numbers
'36811." A wood fence sur
rounds the back yard.
1
[Instrumentality Protocol]
/~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 12 of 84 Page ID #:134
ATTACfiMENT B
ITEMS TO BE SEIZED
ITEMS TO BE SEIZED
specified below):
antiquities.
~2
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 13 of 84 Page ID #:135
c. Records of any- licenses
or permits issued by any
country, state, or munici
pality regarding antiqu
ities.
d. Records relating to Uni
ted States customs or
importation requirements
, duties, responsibili
ties, tariffs,
and/or procedures.
2
[Instrum~nt~lity PrctocolJ
/3
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 14 of 84 Page ID #:136
be seized:
device;
3
[Instrumentality Protocol]
~y
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 15 of 84 Page ID #:137
search terms that the user entered into any Internet search
4
[Instrumentality Protocol]
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 16 of 84 Page ID #:138
Court on or before the date by which the search was to have been
completed.
[Instrumentality Protocol]
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 17 of 84 Page ID #:139
items to be seized. The search team may also search for and
and retain notes regarding how the search was conducted pursua
nt
to the selected protocols.
pending further order of the Court and shall make and retain
[Instrumentality Protocol)
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 18 of 84 Page ID #:140
does not contain any data falling within the list of items to be
the government may make and retain copies of such data, and may
forensic copies of the digital device but may not access them
(after the time for searching the device has expired) absent
7
[Instrumentality Protocol]
i
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 19 of 84 Page ID #:141
above;
data;
'3
[Instrumentality Protocol)
"/
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 20 of 84 Page ID #:142
court order.
y
[Instrumentality Protocol)
y~
...-W:_~ ~.,.ry 0-11-
`J4~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 21 of Page
84 Page~ ID #:143
of
,-
~~
Received By: ~ ~ ~~ ~ Received From:
(Signature) ~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS
~ yX Y r ~ ~ ~Document
1! 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 22 of 84 Page ID #:144
Memorandum of Law
Re: FBI Warrant for Search and Seizure Served on Mr. Al Charihi
Date: 5/20/16
You left your caxd with our above referenced client when you and your fellow FBI agents
raided his home at 36811 45~' Street, Palmdale CA 93552 on or about 3/19/16 and took the items
that you listed on the copy of the Warrant for Search and Seizure that was left with him. We do
not know what was told to the federal judge to have the Warrant issued, but an exhaustive
investigation of the facts and the law show conclusively that (for the reasons given below) you
have no case against him. The warrant should be quashed, the items returned and there should be
no action taken against him. In short customs duties were paid. There was no intent or attempt to
evade customs duties and introduce uninspected items into the United States. No false or forged
documents were used to bring the items into the United States. It is believed that this action has
been taken against him based on sheer Islamophobia and racism.
Statement of Facts
On or about March 19, 2016 Judge Jacqueline Chooljian issued a Search and Seizure
Warrant for the location 36811 45~' St, East Palmdale, California. On or about Marchl9th 2016 at
about Spm the FBI raided that location which is the home of Mohammed Al Charihi',(herein after
' The Client has been in the United States since 1996, for 20 years, he has a wife and two sons ages 10 and 8. He
operated another businesses before becoming involved in the sale of artifacts. These businesses are exporting cars and
working for his brother's print shop in the international department. He became interested in importation and sales of
artifacts in about 3 years due to good connections and his knowledge of people working in cheap labor departments
of organizations involving artifacts. In Syria, his home country, he was a chemical engineer who had one of his own
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 23 of 84 Page ID #:145
"Client") a naturalized citizen of the United States, originally from Syria, who operates the
business of importing, buying and selling ancient artifacts from overseas. He has been operating
this business for 1(one) year and has never had a problem before now with the government
regarding such business. He also operates another business which is buying salvaged cars from
auto auctions, repairing them and shipping them to Africa. He also works in a print shop and has
never had any issues there with authorities. He has never had any issues with the government with
any respect to any business in which he has been involved. However, the "soap incident"
mentioned in the foot note should be addressed in depth.
On or about December 23,2003 our Client was travelling from Manchester NH to Oakland
CA. He had a flight connection in Washington DC. Once he had boarded the plane,two FBI agents
approached him and asked him to go with them. They walked him offofthe plane. As they walked
with him, they told him that the FBI had checked his luggage and found what looked like soap,
but that it could be something else. The FBI stated that they thought it was TNT. They asked him
to wait in a room for about 2 hours. He realized that his plane in Manchester had taken off and that
he had missed his connection in Washington D.C.for his flight to Oakland. The FBI agent put him
on a flight to Oakland, but with a connection in Chicago IL. When the Client arrived in Chicago,
two FBI agents were waiting for him at the gate as he disembarked. The two approached him and
asked ifhe was Mohamad.He said yes. They then told him to walk with them after they introduced
themselves as FBI agents. He walked with them to the FBI office in the airport. They asked. him
about 100 questions about his background, since elementary school through the moment that they
met him by the gate.
Then they told him that they seized his soap and took it to the lab to do some tests. He knew later
that the FBI seized some personal video types that he was carrying with him on that trip. They told
him that they were holding him in the airport until the test result come back from the lab. After 8
hours one of the agent entered the room and told him "I have good news for you." He told the
agent to go ahead and tell him. The agent told him that the soaps turned out to be soap. Then he
told him he was going to put him on a flight to Oakland. The agent asked my Client to give him
an address in California. About 3 months later an FBI agent came to the given address and gave
him the seized video types and told him the FBI would not return the soap. I was held for about 8
hours.
As to the raid in question, the FBI took a list of items, ancient artifacts, mosaics, statues
and other precious figurines. They also took records, laptops, custom broker receipts, bills of
lading, manifests, and other evidence of importation of items into the country. A list of the items
patents registered and recognized in Syria and several other foreign countries when he was only 19. He has no history
of criminal misconduct. He was once stopped at an airport in 2003 with homemade soap. FBI falsely accused him of
the soap being a bomb. After six hours of delay and his missing his flight he was told the soap was soap, but it was
confiscated by the FBI anyway.
z3
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 24 of 84 Page ID #:146
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
confiscated was given to the Client as well as a copy of the warrant. They FBI did not arrest the
Client on the scene, but did convey that he was being investigated for smuggling. The FBI also
broke into a safe owned by the Client and confiscated the documents that were inside. Certain of
the documents confiscated from the safe had not been used in any manner to effect a purchase and
sale or the importation of any items into country, including but not limited to a certain mosaic in
which the FBI seemed to have extraordinary interest.
When an FBI agent questioned the Client on the scene the agent asked whether a picture
of a certain item, a mosaic, had been sent to a prospective buyer. The Client did not refuse to
answer the initial questions, though he was visibly shaken by the ordeal. He did not remember
whether he had sent a picture of the mosaic to the prospective buyer whom he remembered came
to his location to inquire about the mosaic. The agent became hostile and belligerent and that is
when the Client told him that he would not feel comfortable answering more questions until he
had consulted with legal counsel. After the raid he called a friend in Philadelphia to inquire about
an attorney and that friend indicated that the international lawyer who he had already told him
about(for assistance in the sale ofthe item)would be the lawyer whom he should consult regarding
this FBI matter. The Client told his friend in Philadelphia to tell the attorney that he would call
him for a consultation. The attorney talked with the mutual friend from Philadelphia and said he
would speak with the Client whenever he called. The Client called the attorney, answered
questions,forwarded documents and engaged the attorney for the work to resolve this matter with
the FBI.
Through 42 years of experience the Attorney (author of this document) has observed that
when there is an FBI raid the agency works with the Assistant Unites States Attorney(ASUA)to
review evidence, interview potential witnesses, and create FBI 302s to build a case. An FBI 302
is a hearsay document where the FBI interviews a witness and then the agent "says what the
witness said" instead of merely making a transcript of the witnesses' words. This allows the FBI
to twist testimony to their benefit and hurt the accused. If the FBI and AUSA had probable cause
for an arrest, then the Client would have been arrested on the scene. Now the agency and the
government must build a case and take the case to a federal grand jury to determine whether there
is probable cause that a crime has been committed and a grand jury indictment is obtained due to
the AUSA getting them to rubber stamp what he or she wants. During this stage while the
government is attempting to build a case against the Client, his Attorney has used such time to
investigate the facts and research the law to demonstrate that there is no case ofsmuggling against
the Client. The submission of this legal memorandum is the first step in the Attorney's effort to
quash this warrant and have his Client's items returned, especially the mosaic in which the FBI
appears to have so much interest. Here the filing ofa Bivens action2 should be under consideration.
The difference is that in Givens there was no warrant, but there is a warrant in this case. The
ZBivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971),was a case in which the United States
Supreme
Court ruled that an implied cause of action existed for an individual whose Fourth Amendment freedom
from
unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by federal agents. The victim of such a deprivation
could sue
for the violation of the Amendment itself, despite the lack of any federal statute authorizing such a
suit. The
existence of a remedy for the violation was implied from the importance of the right violated. In givens
the FBI made
a warrantless search and seizure of a known drug dealer's apartment.
2~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 25 of 84 Page ID #:147
question becomes whether there were proper grounds to issue a warrant for search and seizure in
the first place.
Legal Analysis
Case Law
An e~chaustive research of the case law shows that there can be no indictment legally
brought against the Client. It is apparent that the government is headed in the wrong direction. The
case law has been very helpful in presenting facts and legal principles to assist the effort ofshowing
that pursuit of an indictment is misplaced. The indictment must be ground in facts and law that
show there has been a violation ofthe smuggling state. One ofthe statutes mentioned in the warrant
is 18 USC Sec. 545:
"Sec. 545, Title 18 sets forth two different crimes:(1) Smuggling or clandestinely
introducing merchandise which should have been invoiced, and (2) Knowingly
importing or bringing into the United States merchandise contrary to law, without
complying with other provisions of law,..." Babb v. United States, 5 Cir., 1955,
218 F.2d 538.
As the above case points out, there is a vast difference between the two crimes.
Smuggling or clandestinely introducing goods or using false or forged documents
on the one hand is "unlawful and evil per se,"(Babb. 218 F.2d at pa ge 540) while
importing, bringing in, receiving etc., goods after importation is not evil per se but
is a crime because offailure to comply with other statutes. The two crimes set forth
in Section 545 can be traced back to two of the old Revised Statutes, smuggling
based on R.S. Sec. 2865 and importation based on R.S. 3082.u"United States
v. Claybourn,180 F. Supp. 448 -Dist. Court,SD California 1960,at page 452,3
If the government brings an indictment alleging that the defendant with intent to defraud
the United States "did knowingly and willfully smuggle and clandestinely introduce into the
United States from a foreign country" the merchandise described in the indictment, there will be a
major problem, since the shipping documents show that the customs duties were paid and all
shipping documents were in order and all costs and expenses were properly paid.
3 The cited case has facts which are different. In Claybourn the defendant carried merchandise in his automobile
across the International border from the United States to Mexico, then returned with the same merchandise in the car,
and did nothing with the merchandise in Mexico. The U. S. District Court for the Southern District of California, San
Diego ruled that this set of facts did not violate 18 USC Sec.545
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 26 of 84 Page ID #:148
Since the word "smuggle" and the phrase "clandestinely introduce" mean substantially the
same thing viewed in the background of English common law, Keck v. United States, 1899, 172
U.S. 434,19 S.Ct. 254,43 L.Ea~ SOS and since they refer to the acts of a defendant surreptitiously
and by concealment or fraud avoiding the customs and introducing goods into the United States,
it is immediately apparent that where the facts show without dispute that a defendant properly paid
all customs duties and fees related to importing, that he was not smuggling or clandestinely
introducing goods into the United States. The purpose ofthe statute is to prevent the surreptitious,
The Nfatthews4 case is not helpful for our attempt to quash an indictment. It is helpful,
however, in an attempt to get an acquittal at trial. It stands for the proposition that when a
smuggling charge is subject to a motion for acquittal at trial, any other charge should be subject to
said type of motion and that the motion should be presented in addition to the acquittal motion for
smuggling.
A motion for acquittal was filed and granted in the smuggling case United States u
Kismetoglu,350 F. Supp.333 -Dist. Court,CD California 1971, where at trial, the court had found
the defendant guilty of smuggling watches and jewelry into the states. In a post-trial motion, the
district court held that this Armenian (traveling with his wife and family) was not a professional
business man or an experienced traveler. The court said the gravamen of the offense was the
clandestine introduction into the United States with specific intent to defraud the United States, of
° In Matthews a UnitedStates,394F.2d I04-Court ofAppeals,9th Circuit 1968 at trial the defendant was acquitted
on a motion for acquittal on the smuggling conviction under 18 USC 545. There was no motion filed for an acquittal
on the Dyer Act offense 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2312.(The Dyer Act is U.S. federal legislation aimed to supplement states'
efforts to combat automobile theft. ... This Act made the interstate transportation of stolen vehicles a federal.
crime.) The Dyer Act is popularly called the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act. On appeal the defendant argued that
the court should enter a motion sua sponte to acquit the defendant on the Dyer Act offense,but the 9~'Circuit disagreed.
The defendant should have had counsel at trial file a motion for acquittal on both the smuggling and Dyer Act offenses.
~- f~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 27 of 84 Page ID #:149
merchandise that should be declared to customs inspectors. The court granted the motion for
acquittal. The court reasoned that he had no intention to clandestinely introduce into the United
States the items (watches and jewelry) for the purpose of smuggling. He had packed the items in
his belongings in order to avoid the secret police in his foreign home country confiscating his
belongings.
The problem with this case is that it has been marked for non-publication and for not relying
on the case for precedent with some exceptions with respect to the appellate court rules which have
been quoted below in this memorandum. It appears that this case comes within the exception,
because the case in subsequent to the year quoted and the case is one involving smuggling even
though this case is different on the facts. In the case of the Client, customs duties were declazed
and paid in the normal course of business. There was no attempt to evade any charges by customs.
The goods were inspected and $560 USD in customs was paid for two mosaics and $360 USD was
paid for a third mosaic. ALL CUSTOMS DUTIES WERE PAID for the items imported by the
Client.
CONCLUSION
It is clear from the research ofthe case law related to the statutes named in the Warrant for
Search and Seizure that the elements for smuggling are not present in the case ofthis Client. There
must be 1)an intent to commit the crime of smuggling, 2)the actual evasion ofthe customs duties
inspection, and 3)the failure to pay customs duties on the item imported. If these(3)elements are
not a part of a smuggling case then there has been no violation of the statute. It is clear from the
facts that the client paid customs duties on all items imported. He imported a mosaic that was
unrestored and un-conserved along with other items. He paid customs duties on all items. After
2~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 28 of 84 Page ID #:150
legal importation of all items, he paid $39,000 to have the mosaic restored by a specialist from
New York. For those who know, the mosaic (in which the FBI has shown extraordinary interest)
is the depiction of"The 11`~ Labor of Hercules". This mosaic gained value only after restoration.
In the states the mosaic (after restoration) could be sold for $200,000 — $500,000. This would be
antiquities museum, a dealer, or an art shop which buys and sells artifacts and antiquities. An
experienced and sophisticated buyer overseas who understands the meaning of the now freshly
restored mosaic and its value has verbally offered more. Prospective collectors overseas feel it has
more value than prospective buyers in the states. That information came days after it was
Based on the above case law this memorandum oflaw has been developed to show the FBI
that under the facts and the law there has been no violation of the smuggling statutes and it is a
waste of time to twist the facts in order to try to build a case against this Client. The government
seized this mosaic and other items in error based on information that maybe found to be unreliable.
FBI informants are not always trustworthy and reliable. It is suggested by counsel that this
resistance to release the mosaic for any reason,counsel intends to file a motion to quash the warrant
and have the items returned pursuant to the case law in this memorandum. Counsel has already
sought and secured local counsel licensed in federal court in California who shall admit counsel
There is some concern that the Client has regarding certain documents that were in his
locked safe and which were not used for importation of the items seized. These documents were
seized by the FBI,after they broke into the locked safe. They did this before he was ever summoned
2~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 29 of 84 Page ID #:151
to his house. They raided the home while he and his family were at a baby shower. They searched
and seized items before the client and his family returned to the home. The FBI had free reign in
the house with no one present. The Client feels that these documents may be misconstrued and
may be improperly viewed as possibly incriminating. They were prepared by the client. The
purpose was to mislead non-serious buyers and possible thieves who had already begun to inquire
about the valuable mosaic, subsequent to its restoration. These non-serious buyers and possible
thieves were persons about whom the Client was very concerned and suspicious. The documents
were never used in a purchase, sales, or importation transaction. They were never used at all.
The mere existence of these documents does not create smuggling liability for client,
because they were never used for any purpose let alone smuggling. No person ever saw said
documents, besides the Client and they were never a part of an import, sales or purchase
transaction. In fact the documents were drafted after the items seized by the FBI had already been
Respectfully submitted,
Zq
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 30 of 84 Page ID #:152
accessible electronic database, the party must file and serve a copy of
that opinion, order, judgment, or disposition with the brief or other paper
in which it is cited.
(As added Apr. 12, 2006, eff. Dec. 1, 2006.)
Fraudulent or false invoice used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 31 of 84 Page ID #:153
Fraudulent or false invoice used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce
any imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false declaration used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false declaration used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce
any imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false affidavit used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false affidavit used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce
any imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false letter used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false letter used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false paper used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false paper used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties.
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
smuggles into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
attempts to smuggle into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a person
clandestinely introduces into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a person attempts to
clandestinely introduce into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced,
OR
3~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 32 of 84 Page ID #:154
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a person makes
out at the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person passes
through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
attempts to pass through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or
other document or paper, OR
A person fraudulently imports or brings into the U.S. any merchandise contrary to law,
OR
A person knowingly imports or brings into the U.S. any merchandise contrary to law,
OR
A person receives merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person conceals merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the
U.S. contrary to law, OR
A person buys merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person sells merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person facilitates the concealment of such merchandise after importation knowing that
it was imported or introduced into the U.S. contrary to law, OR
A person facilitates the sale of such merchandise after importation knowing that it was
imported or introduced into the U.S. contrary to law.
Fraudulent or false letter used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any imported
m erchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
~ 3Z
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 33 of 84 Page ID #:155
Fraudulent or false letter used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false paper used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false paper used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties.
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
smuggles into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
attempts to smuggle into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a person
clandestinely introduces into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a person attempts to
clandestinely introduce into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a person makes
out at the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person passes
through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
attempts to pass through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or
other document or paper, OR
A person fraudulently imports or brings into the U.S. any merchandise contrary to law,
OR
A person knowingly imports or brings into the U.S. any merchandise contrary to law,
OR
~, 33
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 34 of 84 Page ID #:156
A person receives merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person conceals merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the
U.S. contrary to law, OR
A person buys merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person sells merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person facilitates the concealment of such merchandise after importation knowing that
it was imported or introduced into the U.S. contrary to law, OR
A person facilitates the sale of such merchandise after importation knowing that it was
imported or introduced into the U.S. contrary to law.
.may
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 35 of 84 Page ID #:157
The May 17, 2016 certified letter of Matthew S. Rasnake states that the claimant may
request(upon filing ofa claim pursuant to 18 USC Sec. 9830 and 28 CFR Sec. 8.15) may request
to release of the seized property during pendency of forfeiture proceedings due to hardship. This
request is made in writing and the possessory interest in property is established by the Claim of
Ownership dated May 27,2016.
The claimant has sufficient ties to the community to provide assurances that the property will be
available at the time of trial because he has a wife, two children in the community. He has
employment in the community. He has no other ties to any other community inside or outside the
United States.
The continued possession by the Government will cause substantial hardship to the claimant
because the property in question is a restored mosaic which he spent in excess of$40,000 restoring
and conserving. It will be destroyed and lose value in the hands of the FBI, because they are
unsophisticated in the restoration, preservation and conservation of mosaics such as this property.
This hardship outweighs the risk that the property will be destroyed, damaged, lost, concealed, or
transferred. It has no value to the claimant ifit is destroyed, damaged,lost, concealed or transferred
and he will have suffered a great loss if financially if he does not preserve the property.
.~s
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 36 of 84 Page ID #:158
As the legal memorandum submitted by counsel for the Claimant indicates there are no civil or
criminal issues related to the purchase, importation, and restoration of this property. The only
reason that there could be for the search and seizure is racist Islamophobia due the heritage ofthe
Claimant who is Syrian. He is a chemical engineer by trade in his home country of Syria and ha to
leave 20 years ago, because he obtained a patented process on hydration when he was only 23. The
much older professors and teachers were jealous as well as students and chemical engineers in his
field. He came to America 20 years ago to lead a quiet life. He is a simple man. He has been
persecuted before by the FBI when he was taken from a plane and interrogated for 8 hours over
some simple home-made soap. The episode is explained in detail in the legal memorandum.
This request for release of the property is made under oath by the claimant and recites that it is
made under penalty of perjury, consistent with the requirements of28 USC 1746.
Declaration:
I declare under penalty of perjury under the law ofthe United States of America that the foregoing
is true and correct.
Signature:
The request for release of the property has been submitted and signed by the claimant. Whether it
is required or not it has been done pursuant to the 28 USC 1746 declaration (which is similar to
the 5 CFR —Appendix IV to part 1201).
All correspondence should be directed toward the legal counsel of the claimant at the contact
information provided above.
/s/Attorney H. NasifMahmoud
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 37 of 84 Page ID #:159
CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP
The May 17,2016 certified letter of Matthew S. Rasnake states that the seizure ofthe above
property was based on ". . forfeiture for violation of PROCEEDS OF A SPECIFIED
UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY". This vague and unsupported statement pales in view of the legal
memorandum dated May 23, 2016 forwarded to the Special Agent, Elizabeth Rivas, attached
hereto and made a part hereof(see Exhibit F.) The legal memorandum indicates through the facts
and the law that there is no basis for the forfeiture and it lacks even the barest elements to establish
probable cause for the issuance of a Warrant for Search and Seizure.
The statutes above were not complied with and do not support the forfeiture and seizure based on
the following analysis that reveals no violation ofthe statutes and the regulation:
~ ~_
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 38 of 84 Page ID #:160
See Exhibit F.Based on the Legal Memorandum,Exhibit F(submitted herewith),there have been
no violation ofthe statutes and the regulation.
Rasnake's letter states that the claim does not have a particular form that it must follow.
This claim of ownership is filed before June 21, 2016. The claim has been received before said
date by the forfeiture paralegal specialist named above. The author of this claim has the evidence
ofits delivery to said specialist. The property being claimed due to ownership is identified above.
The following are items of documentary evidence to establish the claim of ownership.
Exhibit A Invoice of Mosaic — No. 131552 dated 04.06.2015 (this may be 06.04.2015
as it is in the West)
The Mosaic item is starred with an asterisk and the column reads in Turkish as follows:
Check dated 03-04-16 in the amount of$10,000 payment to Miotto Mosaics Art Studios
for restoring the Mosaic
$37,000 proposal for restoration dated 12-31-15 from MIOTTO MOSAIC ART STUDIOS,INC.
and signed by Miotto(date next to signature is 01-04-15 which is obviously a mistake and should
be 01-04-16)
22 page restoration report(last three pages blank) describing the restoration project and the stages
ofrestoration. Mosaic is a depiction ofthe 11th Labor of Hercules
Group Exhibit E.
This claim of ownership is made under oath by the claimant and recites that it is made under
penalty of perjury, consistent with the requirements of28 USC 1746.
Declaration:
I declare under penalty of perjury under the law ofthe United States of America that the foregoing
is true and correct.
Signature:
The claim of ownership has been submitted and signed by the claimant as required with the 28
USC 1746 declaration(which is similax to the 5 CFR —Appendix IV to part 1201), pursuant to the
letter of Rasnake dated May 17, 2016. All correspondence should be directed toward the legal
counsel of the claimant at the contact information provided above.
/s/Attorney H. NasifMahmoud
39
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 40 of 84 Page ID #:162
Exfiiblt A
~~rBa~fi~vc~
,~anat~t
Tei,: D 536 655 32 65
fekmcu MaF►. 82.5k. Nc.: 3 defntlNA7AY
Z3 Temmux V.D.: A2~ 942 980 90
Tk. Oda No.: ]4982
(Fte,~'k~ra'~ -11~oZaik -~ Ressa~t)
r ~
:..INC~MlAtAJ10 Y+~LC~tARlHl...,...,..,
3l1~i'1'~'ij+'9ia~ret"la~f~pi6n~ ca ~
,......
t'Pa'~d ~9 ~ ~. L 1y~
~ATu~► / fNV~?IGE
BEACH CAt.lgC~TNl/1 SEIN : A i1RA NG
„ T.C.
~~)NY~'a~ .171° ie~~Jr~~
II Kodu : 31 ,p~.ng.Zgtg
r~n•Dae r r2m
AmbuYj BrOt MALIN C{NSM F#YA71!UNITPRfCE KIYMETIiAMQI1riIT
Ads Kp. QESCRiPTIQM ~ ~~~ C10WZ T. iirss~ I}f1VIZ T. t.iras~
IiI1~T K W1U1M CIM~1 M RfD. 117.E .MIK rtlM
f .~Q ict. 1COtI n 90waDcm lyw~~ 90s utZ~v .Qi3 rco t , ha 1.83i 91
1 ,00 o a4~r,~ocm q+~te~~ S(t~ VJ~DBt! t AQ xt► 1. ~
1.~Q ia. 1.83 t 93 i
22,OQ 6t►x~ro ~+r++~r Jl09 vr~zo~11 .tlQ xa 2, rn
t .OM1 ~a a,83 f 1 ~f! ~
2.W ~G~dcm ~w~E sl~~ v,~,to~u .t10 Ke► 1. ~e~
2,~ Na ].83 ~ 83i
a.at ~a~ac~r, e~~ sus ~v~a~ .i~J xa 2. ~e
3A0 ~a ~.e3 ~ ~~ t
t?.00 ~4w~dc~m ero+~~ st~d1 v,~t~S(,r t ,0~ Ko 3. hn
3AQ +~ 7,@3 s 2 ~~i
~.Cl~ ~Dr+ltlar► ~HGE ~!v,4~A8li .~Kl Ko 3. ~n
.Ott ~a 7.63i ~Qi
b6,Q(1 70~Qwr+ C~W~E SOti v~tlUikP .~ ~m 5. ~►a
e,00 ~ 1.83i 1~ ~
oe,00 eon~w~~ ~~ ~,~zc~ .~o ~~ e. ~o. ~.aa ~ a a~:
.W ~►a 2d0,Q0 saauacn+ erw~~ COs v,~o.9t► ,00 +~o ~4. no 7.83; ~ 00 i
SAO ~a 102,Oq tt~~oam ~N~E Sf?5 VhZ08R~ ! .0~ Ko f 2. u►
4,W ~4 7.~3 i ~3
72.00 t14z~oame~w~e~ltvr~ta~ti 7 .0~ Ka 4 ,►n
7 X10 ~w 7.93 ~ 31 i
f 2!l.OQ r 1~r~ctn B~tM~~ Sftii vAZI'~it ! ,~0 ~r 7,
~~ r+a ~.n x,83 ~ '.i4 1 ~
1BO.OU f~Ut~~iofi tWW~~ ~S L~b'f44,f t „pR «o t~, wo,
2.U~ w 7,83i 7 3
40At1 1aCx~aan elW~t S~?8 ~~t ,OQ stn 2. An 7.6~ 3 1 i
Z.OR w. 5~~i0 r~GuiK r~e~w +ca 2 ~a ,00 s ~ .t 1~ t
c 000~u.~w~ra~~t,~~
4 ,(10 ~. 40.Q0 ~ODa700ont Mc]ZNK T ,QQ xB 1, Kn 1.~ t 3p t f
t t~+iiaw►r~ur
~ 1.78~1~ 'f.Tlt ~ 2 i
Y ►Z IKlOINYt1?AdlKf?W~10Mii7~
t BANKJ< <iMM1Tl 6MW►[~kB! ~ttr4W ~;
~1~CN'l1 FOB
~o ~e►cu v~nrx 1~' ~ ~`. ' ~. ,~t~ ~
AH ~~'~' STANGf
~: ~ ~, , j ~~ vb.-r S~w~l~~
~ ~
~: .oan,
* r
GARAIVT'1 i~ANKAS! lBArt : TK2 ~i 0981 3~
We Hs~'eby $end GB "~~ o4V6tt9tt by tfili reo6lpi a►'~ sII 7urki~th Quin
eNtd Fua►e ~fti~ . dcf~ wfiit 1at8e1 what 30 Duet.
~a
CaseFargo
Wells 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS
View Check Cop; Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 41 of 84 Page ID #:163
Page 1 of 1
~- ----- - — ~
- 7023
AERON~X
+vv a van~ciri i tv_A•ra
•AMOflY.CF W IYrlL'0
.uio%~1F
1t 14'110 ~:N
~ UACF G~— ~~
~ PAY ~U I'H= 1my
nao~RaF_ . I~1(~(~ /✓I_QS~~S,~-r~. nG.os i $ EOo~C~
Q0 oounas ~ "~~'
~;w.
;
/n
FAp.~~e~w,r7 ~tl~_ I,~,ca t r. __ ___._...
-
:~p000D0i~23~ ~:122~0024~~: 88 36 295066' ~+
~.~•a+~ r -- -- -r r... -- . ~. ~ Y.raa~
r ~~~
~~'1~ o ~ ~
~~ ~ ~~~x~~ ~~
~` o
00'000`OT - ~
{~ ~T_
Ntl ?5 80
to
9TiVQ/:0 Of TZ'!
~ ~d~Hd~
~/
https://image.wellsfargo.comlimagemanladjust.do?cid=1464897781565
~i~i~~~ ~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 42 of 84 Page ID #:164
E"n ~►, ~ ► ~~ C
PROPOSAL
COST: $37,000.
PAYMENT SCHEDULE:
First payment of $1,500 received for preliminary inspection
trip
Remaining balance of $40,500. to be paid in three installmen
ts
$12,333. as down payment to start project, purchase materials,
etc.
$12,333 second payment when we have completed 50% of the
work
$12,334 upon completion and acceptance of the work/^
,
Res ectfull submitted Ste hen J. Miott ~ ~ ~ ~ ' P ~~/" `~ ~~ ~
Acceptance of proposal and provisions outlined above,
Mohamad Alcharihi
~f Z
132 CRANE ROAD • CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 •TEL. 845-
628-8496 •FAX 845-628-1845
miottomosaics@mac.com
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 43 of 84 Page ID #:165
Ex 1 ~ ,~ ~~, ~ i
' ~_ =~
' ~ ~.~-
.... ..
~ V ~V-+
- ~~ -~~ _
RESTORATION REPORT
The first step in restoring this mosaic was, to access the condition of the mosaic
and any damage done in removing the mosaic from it's original substrate, and the the
subsequent rolling of it like a carpet. Upon visual inspection it was evident that many of
the tessera were damaged, either through wear and tear through time or in the removal
process or rolling it up. I believe that many tessera were crushed when the mosaic was
rolled into itself, with the fabric on the outside and the tessera on the inside of the roll.
Due to the fragile state of the mosaic, and the amount of damaged and cracked tessera,
made the decision that the mosaic had to be set onto a new substrate, before
attempting to remove the fabric that had been glued to the surface. i believe that the
glue used was a neoprene synthetic rubber, that was used in the late sixties and early
seventies, this gives us an indication of the time that the mosaic was removed from it's
original substrate.
~. -
w
'C
-.ar
.-
Given the size and weight of the mosaic we decided to divide the mosaics into 5
panels. We carefully cleaned the back of the mosaic to remove all dirt and dust from the
surface, any tessera that were loose were saved to be used later for repairs. We first
used soft brushes and then a light duty vacuum cleaner to do this cleaning. We had to
spray water on to the back of the mosaic to bring out the color of the tessera, because
the Lime , from the Lime &Sand mortar that was used to originally set the mosaic,(the
method used in the first century AD to set mosaics) was still on the surface of the
tessera), so we could see the design and decide where to divide the mosaic in to
sections. Using a small fine tip razor we carefully cut through the fabric to divide the
mosaic in to 5 sections.
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 45 of 84 Page ID #:167
,$.
,
f r'
~i'~~. ~ .+1~
~ ~ E ~ ~.-
l~~ ~. ~i,yp.
4 ~ ~
O~, ~~< ~~ 'titi ' ~~ ~ '~~~
i r ~~ +
k. y 6 i Y~.
•rte a ~
iI ~
R "i
` ► '"~
:'6
~, _ _ • ~ Y•
i ~ ,i
~~
~ a. Ar'.
ry
-3!
~j
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 46 of 84 Page ID #:168
We then carefully slid each section of the mosaic on to a honeycomb panel, and traced the
perimeter of each section on to a honeycomb panel. Once we had traced all of the sections,
using a jig saw we carefully cut all the panels to size. We then sanded the surface of the
honeycomb panels, and scarified the surface with a carbide tool; when this was done we
stapled fiberglass mesh to the surface of the panels. All this was done to insure a good bond,
when attaching the mosaic to the panels. After placing ali the panels together, We then set and
drew 4 horizontal lines on to the panels and attached two stainless steel t- nuts at each of this
lines for each panel, giving each panel 8 attachments points from the back for installation of the
panels. A scale drawing was created showing the placement of all these attachment points,
creating an adjusted and calibrated guide map for the installation process.
y~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 48 of 84 Page ID #:170
Since the mosaic was surtace mounted to the tessera, we had to back grout the mosaic with
mortar to ensure full coverage and filling of all the voids on the back of the mosaic; bringing the
grouted mosaic to a uniform thickness. We then put thin set mortar with a notched trowel on to
the panel, we took the panel flipped it over onto the mosaic, and clamped the panel and the
plywood supporting the mosaic together; and flipped everything over. We removed the plywood
and placed the mosaic on the floor. We carefully checked all the edges to of the mosaic and the
panel, and carefully rubbed with a wood block, and the rolled the back of the mosaic with a
roller, making sure the mosaic was completely adhered to the honeycomb panel and set at a
uniform depth. We repeated this process for the five panels, carefully setting each panel next to
each other making sure the mosaic was set at the same depth for all five panels.
i
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 49 of 84 Page ID #:171
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 50 of 84 Page ID #:172
S~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 51 of 84 Page ID #:173
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 52 of 84 Page ID #:174
SZ
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 53 of 84 Page ID #:175
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 54 of 84 Page ID #:176
Through out this entire process we had saved any tessera that had come loose as well as some
areas that were cut off the outer perimeter of the mosaic,we searched and located some marble
that matched the colors in the mosaic and cut tessera to sizes used in the mosaic. After setting
all the panels on to a wall, we fixed all the joints between the panels, making each panel fit
seamlessly next to each other. We then repaired, or replaced the most egregious damaged
areas in the mosaic ,using our judgement dependent on colors we had available to match the
existing mosaic .Care was taken to carefully cut each tessera to match the size used in the
surrounding areas.
To remove all dust and or grout haze created by the repair process, we cleaned the mosaic
once more with a light solution of Sulfumic acid. We then applied an impregnating enhancing
sealer to the mosaic , to protect the surface and to bring out the color of the marble.
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 55 of 84 Page ID #:177
r .•
~
Y
~ i
j
~ .r.1
~
M y/y r
i
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 56 of 84 Page ID #:178
S6
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 57 of 84 Page ID #:179
♦ ~.~, 'F
1. .~ iii
,4
e"
e 1. ~wsl.~t t ~'-
~•~
~ l~ ~ ~.~
4 `' ~ ` ~~ ~,is , d i
._
,`
. ,~ ~r ~~; ,Y~
~i
~ x, _ I.- .~
-r ♦ .
+M' ~r ~~
=~ ti r y .
k ~"'~
~~ ~
~~~ ,
~~~~~
_ 3~~
fli.. ~~ '~.',~~'
,,•~ ~~ ~
~ ~-
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 58 of 84 Page ID #:180
~; ta ~ .:
w ~~ tip ~`~
~ ~7' c
t ~ ~.
*
! S
,'~ ~ .s.,
? ~~ t w ~ f'
T ~, p y~ V
y~+s
~ .._, .
1
I,~~ v. '
~i:I
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 59 of 84 Page ID #:181
~_ . +~'
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 60 of 84 Page ID #:182
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 61 of 84 Page ID #:183
~~c i~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~
~1[ f4CUt
Q~~~~'1~
MRl~itY/~4• IihTJk'~'
~~~~ ~~F1~Q~~~~~,~~
~~til#$I~IYC
fi. Sirs ~hn; kc~l~ertn ►tiurt~~ ~~~ t a}~ ~c s(lrler-t ,~~}.+r}~rs r.~a~~rC~~ ", ktnr
~?4[~i°'
~lL'"1'1"I IIH[9t !' If7~YT~~, 11WY1~'lt`' .Il'faFit~M`(. i$[t ~➢iu:~ Ala ~biti'~.u~,Ct. i~C'~L:tl(iflKlii 1)~~ ~'t;~ft~S
wfa+n~~~}
~Itt1~M~'#~ll~ el%k~!'l ~ a~,`ICS~tJt4. 91RiS11~'f`'f , dSt1'FM~~`"E~ t! ~`utititt^ i~Cti
~U~t. — ~~:},(llft1rN <~E'~ O~i~T4klA.tt#67!~K ~t12111t1EE
Q ~. ~v~
y 181
licit ~1
` ~~
~. 1"uk~Yt~ Tcntmlr~n~u9 }° Inn ~ '~wnlu ktttu:S~ dtttuii~~~t L''Uc '~3rrs~ci; C~duy~~t T,~~lb. Qtunur_
1 ~ tt+~r~ ~i luthc~ric}` Cactt~lia•. T}iat 'i~vr {itu~d~s Ck~~ 7tsc~3 :~lha,cc ~ hi~utat~ ~~
G~~utiEz} Sitt>w'n i~ Cite
L`~~tar~~it~ u,~~~;n~-~t~ 1c~ mats►~r~~~rcw. rl~+ ti e+_cJ~„u. ,cml ,m~ tnvir+ts ~i~~ ~s~~ tir~terat~t dan~ ~ c~,:~e'+~fr~
+ °9. {'~~
: are °~
> t ~` ~ '~
Durz~n~Iea~tc 9cn ~,..r 1:+~Uly.~l~'i,~1~:; ~•c 1'~tkill'~1ert~ui~ii 4'!i~)ir~t »~«~-
~~:C t [C t)1 itti'1~_-{k1Yllp,- SiL'.^.:71!!iY :~[l~f c'21i~13~} Ut Ccf1t1~YCFeitC $Ut}1t1Clt)
~
L, cu ~! t~~l~ a1r ~~ti~. ~.~nL~., ~1. ~~ n.~tt„r~, ~e~i~:i~+err, ~t crh'h~t
tiIC ~'~r34tstdlt l~~[ii(J~Ie~tC
~;~Ki L~STESI
AAAABAL.AJ ADET 81RlM i{G. BRl)T Kt~. NET KG.
1,(lQ rtt 56x40cm BAH E St3S YA20St3 1.Qf! AD t0,t]0 5.bfl 1Q,0(T 9,f)Q
$Ox41}cm BANE SUS VAZO6U i,Db ~ lO,tMl 40.411 10,E 1fl,OQ
4,OQ ~t~ 6Ux~Ocm BAH E SUS VAZOSU 2.0~T A~ 41,fl(l 1p,50 ~2,~ 21.E
~,on ~a ~oxz~a~ ~+►+~e sus v~zasu 1.vo w ~;oo z,c~ z,oQ z.00
?.00 na 3oem aaH E sus vaZ€~su 2.00 ~a 3.bQ 3.00 S,Q4 6.40.
3,00 AC1 40x4Qcm ~H E 5115 YAZt7SU 3.Q0 Aza 4,tH? 4.Q0 t2,U(3 t2,[iQ
3.OQ aD 64x4oc~r+ BAH~E SUS vAZOSU 3.~ na 10.00 10.00 3i3,OQ 30,x}
5.00 nD 74Ya0cm eAM ~ SUS vAZQSu 5.U0 Hsu 13,04 19,04 55,QU 5R+~~
8.~ np 9ox~4Ucm BAk ~ SUS VAZ~Std 8,~ Af3 12.OQ 12.OQ 9~6,tM1 96.E
211,00 nts x4ocir~ BA,M E SUS VA2GSU 20.E ~e~ 13.()0 13.U0 260,00 260,Q0
12,W Ao 1DOxa0cm BAH ~ Sus vnZtlSu t2,~Db no 1~.OQ 1G.(lU t~2,40 t92,0U
4,00 A0 11Q~cd0«n 8AH E S[i& VAI03U 4,QU ~i1 18.00 18,00 72,(70 72.00
7,00 a[~ ~?5xattcm ~4N ~ St3s vAzt7SU 7,011 au 1 .04 18,00 126,OQ 126,OQ
tU.QQ ate t2ox4~ax~ BAtl~E SItS V~C3~U 10,(~ A~ 18.OQ 18.t?0 tB0,D0 tB~,f?G
z.aa ~~ ,~nx~o~, anw ~ sas v~+zos~ a.on ~~ ao.oa ~n,Qa eo,c~n +o.c~o
~,~ A~ Mt7dANi iABL~ 5 d§~z~3'fl[at~ (J1d5~*AL ISESME "F+4$Cl Y~R D~1$EP X54 $ ~.~Q .Aft 2~Q,~ ~~~,~Q ~4,(~Q ~Q,[~
1.~Q AQ M{~Zfsllf TABC~ d ~R:~51~'r+~~/ll K~SME TA$l4 YES MEN 1,~Q AC3 '~,4Q .Q~ ~,~ ~Q..E}Q
AHM T USTAI~+~CI
~v~(Qve H e S trrs~
a~ r u. . ~
.w.-. ,._
5
E
fi
- ~,
X 71 er
~ '+ "~~+
,~ - , 4
r t~ ~
~~'
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 63 of 84 Page ID #:185
PO Numbers :
Vessel Name / Vo a e :POILUX DG3085
MBL # : TR20332Q63
Loadin Date
HBL#
CN7R # TEMU5168780
To be completed by suppliedbuyer
1.SeEler(Name and Full Address) To tre completed at origin
2.Buyer(Name and Fuil AdoressJ
AHMET BOSTANCI
CEKMECE MAH.82. SK. N0:3 MOHAMAD Y ALCHARIHI 36811
QEFNE HATAY 45TH STREET FAST PALMADALE CA 53551 PORT OF
I LONG
BEACH CALIFORNIA MIDAN1967@H~TMAIL.COM
6
~ 3
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 64 of 84 Page ID #:186
MdRKS dNQ NOS ` N4 AND KIND D€SGRFPTfftd R7F PACKAfiES AND(:,LSODS AS STATED 8Y
~ONTAlNE# ANf~'SEALST OF~~ACKAG~S ~ SNiFPER GR05S 4'~EiGHF FARE AAEIxSUREAiENT =
SHIPRER'S LOAD 3TQW AMD COUNT SAID TD C{7NTRiN CARGO
Shcet 2 of 2
~B~vE PARirCUtARs pECCARED By SH=PPER, CARRIER rt4T
RESPONS+BLE.
AaDIFIDNAl CLAUSES.._ _ _
A@SIIf~87gR. AG a~d~alin!4lf ^.OS~4 m.;Wd~:ia~ buc not +~n~
~ :!a s¢cragrx. ]rniur;age as the aNem~a~=~:e ppn c~
balm an (omard-ate Sr&gnl atoll pe Eoe A4~rsr,a I caya6+~ Crr~~ s ~:e=:~F>
~y
F'LAGE.AND,DAl'E ~F ISSUE MERStN 07 JUU 2015 SIG'VEd FOR TF+E CARRIER GP~iA CGM 5 A
r
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 65 of 84 Page ID #:187
.._ __.. _
SNfVRER
VDYA N M
AHMET 80STANCf
CEKMECE MAH. 82 SK. N0~3 ~G308S
DEFNE - HaTAY ORIGINAL T--"T~-"" ~""""-~—-"
B#LL OF LADING HunABER
BILL OF LADING rR2o3s2o~a
CONSIGNEE
~_ _~~~a EXp('~R7 E2Ef~RENCES
MDHRMAD Y ALCHARIHI _. , _, _. - -- ___ __.___.__._~_ —x
36811 45TH STREET FAST PALMAL'ALE CA ____ . -- .-_----. ..._ _ ___ __ ___—.-__
83551 PORT OF LONG BEACH CALIFORNIA
Midan t967~ho~mail.com ~~'"""
~~~~
~`bt~..(..GR' ~C,;iP~1S~s~~"sd"L~RK:~'f
CjE?l1~ACFi~1 c~ rl %,S.
.. . N~~r.: ~~ -
j _.
Outgoing wires cannNy besenrfor Wells Fargo customers.Provide the CastomerCbpy to the customerensuring you give them the Vshre iranefer Agreementnn pages 3and 4. Note
WeTIs.F~ago Wire Transfer 5ernses v~iFl route wirEs based on zarresp4nd~t banking relationships.See the WirE Transfer Information forexplaray~ons ofthe Mexican CLABE number,the
$VJiF~ B1C,the International Rfluting Code(IRC'~ and the International Aank Account Number("IBAN").
Originator's Infnrrt~ation
OnginaEorName: Street Address
:
fCF?h.SC ~i-:~SI:~ ~%xR=i= ~ ER~..~ _.. :-i ;-n=.
Primary Id Type: Primary ID Desccip~om. ~ Address L~rte 2:
~• PagE 7 of 4
wrRs6aa to-~ s svP~
_, ~. ~fir~^' ~sfer ~n+ices ~c:t~9~r~ Wi~~ Trar~s!e= ~Cequesx
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 67 of 84 Page ID #:189
~~3~~~~6~k~ ~~A~~6 6F~~a ~.s the itsxartC~a! irsgr¢a~o~€~ wher8 ttse bene~c+ary me;n~airts tn~r actoinL}
kBRr~~~ SV~l1F~J~P~. 8enefrci~y6ar~~i~~tme
1Fdl~~ ~~~~s .
~1ice framer fees w#t3 he raaa~ger to[nc tl~rc;i~~;a~s ~}~~;r a::au:~~. Add+t~on~l fees from ~~ens~ary and beneficiary bad rr~y be char~e0 €o r~.terr~af~~~al aan~cEFc~.
~y scgnatsrr~ ~~~ indic~res ey~ce rfni Er atl of the u~'vmiatsm an this Oatgamg Wi,e Tra~sferReq~gst and to Fire ia-ms and castdi#~ff+~ ttf;his ret]uesl. ~`~`eils'argo is authanzsci tc relu
on tip? m€orrr~ai~ari ~n U~{s Re~~Est ~- r :sn~ ls~e r~ou~te~ funds transte:.
r~ti 4F Orr~tre<~s 5;~sa.~rL ~'#lEs ~ar~~ Yt~ire ee ~mau~.r
- c< ~ c.
~~~€c~e~~r ~i~~~tu~~
(1n~rata- ~;Gr~e
Bat~k~.~ ~t'~oY2~-
~~kCt'Ff~, !f u+}~ $~!1£~LF6'aji ~$j'1~ d1eS R~? 93~' i~7e i~~!€s'~SJ S'~7~,",F~~ ;~7 I~ ~f(~fa.8 fE~I.~RtI 1~~(Q ~B PIPS$ OR~ r'ti'tBf ~Eli3 ~ &f[~0 ?tv,s FL",.@R.`~'0 ~U~i:i78tfiK~ ~~L~ E EECtF-v`G'~~4C~ l&~.7~:
c!the Qrda..r 2nti J~:I~ ~ar~fls rn f~~ ~cas~~~sis~n esit~ 6ur~ fieEuEe~ gas ~acm~'ked ~ ccy t~i~~ e~ie~s 1~ QtGa.{~ ~''~e wdsr cs payahi~ Rn Faaeigr+ i.~r, .i~~#s €~P~ v~~~i ;,ot be txeh:e
`sir a sum r~ exce~ c~ :ate v~~ n►~ C~~~ a~~: ~t ras D~~~+ eQrve-t.~c3 dam €o~ G~tr~ty eca l!S Q~1~ars ai~'~ Far~a's t~s rv+~g ram hu ~xeh~~ge at ~~~ s;r,~ as =:he ~nc~zz~r~ of
the ~:dsf ~srA ~r^~ed'~, 4Ffelis F~qt
F~~ure t~ sr~tts~er Rrap~r lRr~rr;tnt ~: ~es~s :ergs ,s ~s~ae~e~ n sib ~t s ~a4 a*nourtt stdm ~ iteaue~ Vi€e~;Fate's sole ?~zb~ti:g~ +~nli tre ~n ~ar~tl~ eu€~::tz a
ge:and P:;yir,~rsR ~r~p m Rhe ~~rtsit o#' ifie stated n~::~y.:~ t~~eYts € ~rg9 ~ te5 zn instsu.^tk~'F inEat a+ ttnE amnrsrz ~~1ra tt~e Rastu~st, m ~e ent~~~t i~aP C~ ~c~cratvr ~+oe~
:ot cr~sive ~'~2 be;~~~~ ~ E~ t3r~r, !~~lL Ferga t~Ei only b~ Y~ ire any ~sss o€ u~ ~xinra~! am~mt Ua,~s~erred ~r~ e aF t~arr+a~rr~ s' d a~ ~z ~~cgu~~ inst~~r?~a~s.
.h~~a~auta9l~. ~4te9ts FaFga ~nY3 n~ fe2~l~ fir iFre an+c~st ~ srst~es: tt~~ ~~~ur Eras ku: d~~~ to ~e crans€~r c~ tt~ sxces~ a L ca~~c~# ~t trs~ d~~ cam:F~~al gr.:r:~ -ate.
~iov~~~r~r, lk~e8is ~2.rga s Pe~b~li:y frsr krts~ u¢ ~~st~est ~a~b t:~t~ ~ ~y (139 :,~~,~d~r dae s ir~€eresi. was ~ti€~ s foss ffitall~ F~~s corrr~~~t~ t a~atacy t€r ~e oa~:~=ssE:ed ~rde~
'v ~grEa!Ret1i. _
~'~i5
Fsrsat~t~ €ef c~s~f~ss. ~ ire ~~~ w~Ei is~ iclas an4 vnli not ~ ~ui~~:d to std ssymerd trr r~ralf, e~r~p. that bl~~i~'ratga may, et G'-~e oru~crta~e~r s ~eaue~u make an ~~vrt to e~~esi ~,~ sty.
;.~mes~rt or recast. In s.tc~? use. Y~i~ Far~u: an€3 ;rt;~s n~ faa~ht~ gr~ its fa~sre ~ 3¢+t}r eff bra sa.
~ae.~. #n adtkt~ €Q ti~re c~utgrs+s~ ~,nre trans€~r fee. ~s~s:~~.~} e~ray app;. Addi~a-ra6 fees ca,~ xic~e. ~::it+~dE ttCtt h~titBd x4' Zd7 3i~dti][t+"t24 `2~ 4L=s bdst?t t[:sia~?C iT~n5dS11s::i5,
~B.~dmenttees, s~aLm~t fps, Fees a ivy seP4~s~,•y ~i'J +~t ediary Barsky, sic.D:7 ir~reaY's~rai [nstgci;t} ,r~ a ~~V~i' BJ~. fR~, lEi~ ~ ~lA~£ mrm~ ~s rYac p~ova
the fore~g-: F~2:~~s rn~y ~tt~3m Ute anv~ ~r e~;ess a ~erstfi~ara~ ~~ Faryo fr~,-~fer Fees are ds ~ ir, tau Wiest r~eri f ee a»d fr~fnrnatiu~ Sd'redule a-ag ce€a~ arne~c~+er~s.
~ct5 ~f Csts~, 1Netb ~~~.ga ~s ex~a~~ ~: ~~a~ ~r ra}#~~-~ tai e:~c~t~ #~ (~r~; t~ its ex~s}i that tt~ G~~y a~ `a~.sre re~ssi~ ice~r~ ~ ease Dey~~i €f~ re~sanat~ ~c~~ ~ 1~'eils Fasc~-
izt~~~ic~~aa1 area. ~At:r~ ~$~n~ Co fared c~~€ter~ F~~-;t~~e ~i(?r:~eenl r~anaas d big ~ rem fr~r~iym ctsua~tGy. Af! mare trader tsayrti~r±is sksiniatJ te- Earcpe ~he~4d
z,~ 2 ih£ `J ~ aa:l'1~( ~¢2~•.'T~i@f ~DY.~E (~~~, ~'PiF~m~l,'!'i@S R 1TL+ C (IR~3 $5 r'$1~tC813~. ECdf4f F7a!'i~Gtp~~'It~1f,(H3f?NN't~~5 EhQ t3efLEflGs~+fS I~Ef:?8Fl[lTI31 SoE1~[ ~...3~U•'i° "ut3F~~~
~i~k.~v;. k~~-xes~ harks re~~re ~ Ct~E rnr, rr a~p~~ t~ ire ~ ~ ~~.
7
~.St~fFi' Sa c k~rt`uater Cie i~'VI~i~.Th2 ~ 0~' ~ E G`i~~[iC" Smearf' ~'{G t5 ~ ilr4s~!!£'s^a ~S 4f 3~Iid fH1[:t?,rtC C`~C3tt~lS Sl3at 32@173 l8 ld8f#tff~' B Sf3^~~i~c ~~~-.2~~s2i :nM~c:,t~~-+ ~hP 5i?~;r
$~ SYl01fl~',L Rk5I8~~ fT4fi ~t2 bPJ3~(tG3~.!fl 2t'IStlt2 ~7r1'~#~ Cft'3ts=EG§ ~ bQ ~71~ Ebb'# irit2:it&UfNsd1 f~tl{~Ok9Q SWf~S Iti:~stfe tP~ St?d!f'e B~ e ap~hcub.~.
i.i r~xaa~ia~z~ ~ts~ut~ng ~+d~ ff~3, S~~ c~un~'ies iPn^n~ra € irn~atran2!beta €a•;aara,~eit~ ~~12 cre~€1ir~rrr~ti irouting codes. ~fiue: ~,-~ ~sg~ in cor,Zb=;v~ti~~
month ~e SU`~!Fi f~lp to asd +~ rcx~3mg Lh~ pa3xt~tt#,`resigh a st3~sn o~sce try a br2r~:.:~~ cas~~ ~.as a sue. c name #or tt~r rtw:r[sng cote ~~.e.. art Coti~ !r, Ns~ iknteai hrrt~~~
:,~n~t1 mettEs l~ssgu~~a~tt i~aFer~ lk~►rr~~s to i',ai's~da1. f~rr' ate tctarp r~a~ provrde the ir~t~tsrai~ti^3{ IOlI~I-~ Cif' W f857~Jst328 ~PF_,EfrF t1F 3~ itYktY12{10Y1~f FJ33j11i'+~ SE:1L~171~
^~ir'~ iPES :~]ef ~@
~A21FG Yd:~YdC'I ~~ ~C 9~['fP-1a PS ~~ Q~9ti ft7~ 9+siF2. ST ~a`~E I'~C2~9~.^j ~*~C C't~ L~~l~}ZE! ~ id3s'~ W~F~l1 Ii'€1$ Fi4;~6i'!~± F5 tt~+!' !f'f~ifC~'~ ffi i'}'1£ ~3}Tit~71~ u't5ITUC$iOftS. 3~~ 3i~i~li~v
ate.
;.Ir~t~sa~unai dank ~cea~
; ~t~(~: Tire ~A.ti s~:~ ~y sxusrr~y~mst+tuti~. W~mg! fhuy the bar~M rrg an actasu~:tcar~ gro4~ t~se erect t&4Iti of ~.t
atcourrc end rw~t 6e air from U~ b~r~rs~eey of the tv~~.~a use tsz a ~rtics ,~ rs~y ws~ac+:~ iBAfd carp daisy Ghe vw~e, t~ kite recenctrtg ss~~bt ~+ag ~eium t"2
moue ~r?+en t*;e IBk~t ~s nQt mctuct26 nr r,#~ payme,-,t ~nsc~nons an3 a~R~c~~1s~~ rr~ay be sss~s~t.
~~ ~~c€ 3 0~ a
'Jd'R66C3 (S-s 5 SEfP} l~+esls ~arg~ Can~derc~~?
__ .. ~,~..
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 69 of Seni~ces
V~fi: ~=--~rst~: 84 Page ID4~t,r~
u~cGq~nc #:191T;a~4rwf (is:,u~s1
d. lrscF4n ~an~s~aiaE system Cede @FS~3: Euerr.ind~an haroe naya urnque eleven 1111 tha~act~*rat~ha nuner~c rune ~GenUfy~n~the banis ~ra*n~ t~ recNrv~ :ne ~~n~e tra~33~er 'u
CnSUrC Y;r?E~~y' delivs.Y, please ~e sure Chat rcRerttat~ona!cutgo~nq urge,ir+rFude the 1FaG ati~sre ~:plicapie.
y,l~exie~ C~~~E A~eourat Ht3u~xtb~r: A,~exica~ na.;r s noweeau,re an'i8 ai r# C!RBe accos~~t nunbe he ~dtled to the ~refrc~ary ~nsVuctioa~s tc ensure payrr:~~;. i ~.a ~,.fiEc
number ~s regLirai! nr~ a1J ►v~eajca+n Pes~~ (~49XPd} and UiL~ ~+ay" 2nis s~,~t [o Viesi~e. the ~tP.i3E acto~~t rn;mtrer nest hs n~iamed f~em she bane{aasry. !rtne aenef!L'1~'Y S34c^S 'Y,];
r~~L~e t~P CL~~~ a~tou.,r rn~mtrer rtease ~ia~~e t'~e ~ser~e~~eiary co.rta~t t~ei; hand:, U~~alls largo does n~E ~ravide er calculate tine CLAB£, 5en~(:n, s +mire ;~rehou~ e ~ FiBt 2ccou^••
r~~.;mtaer raq delzy IY~~ •are°e a: the r~c~~vrr,~ aanm Tray recur-+ i1:e ~+s;e ~~ [he C A,fE ~3 rsot rnc4~r1~ n~ the payment i+~st:-ut:Frns, and addKioaa3 €ees :naV be asscsse~
~J.. L°~I~~CS ~~~Tt~}Q f~O7fii#~.'i~CS~?~1~!~ T VGL: ~t0 t?EEI :13~'~ 3 ~~~i~~C. t~!1'n', tF$L. i~'",. Cf+'~BY.iW^ vLRgE nurrr.~er, tnatyon con~a~ tnebe~~atcFary o{ [hE c ite "f tt~.e ~re~~c!a^: cites rC'
have the Heated er:"errt a gar:. ;~lerse nave ~e ne:~ef~uary c~nta~t ihe~r dank to otrt~~rt the apnra~r;ate ;r~£arrna~ion. 5endmg intem~t orrai rvi~es wref~o!;t ~e regwrsC ~nffl~~?s~~~r ~ ~
~a~se tt;ew:~e *c bs ~eiayeif. r$i!u~Ef, nr axc:sssc~ ao~iFianal?zes. Fa lr~t$rrat,cnai.w~tgatng n~res nnlY tiy~en sending m iorE~gn e~rra-~cy, please ensure trw_ ~e~e3~c~-~v s ac~:cr~-t
accepts r.~e ~esagnated feign ceranc~. tntamat:onal Eoreigr* c~:r~nry ars:es are ge~erat yiess ex~ers~ve to sr~d as campare~ witr~ ]rtternauor~l JSD wrres i~ ~~et~s ~ ar~~ wire iec ~s
always Ins urnen the ~ti~~r~ ~~ sent m fore~gr currenc,.~ and ifilE14S rar~3o does ~ttt cha;a:. a ca~v~ting fQe: sys a3se offer comRetrtivE exchange races.;
OQ2 ERAMZC,LTNGLA~ED,TILES,CUB
N6907.10.00a0 313~g 6 M2 39 FREE NONE
C35
R I~iYNTE14ANCE FEE .1250$ .49
2I.9
Qther Fee Summary for B#a~k 3~ 85. Totsl Entered V~ue Ggp USE ONLY TOTALS
501 2.75 iJNDE $3.O1 NOT REQUIRE A. u~ G(3 B. Ascertained ty 37, uty
21 .00
Total Offer Fees
R ON CC?DE C. AsceRam~d Tax 38. Tax
g .OQ .00
36. DECtARATION Of lf~PQRT~R OF RECORD D. Ascertatne lather 9. Qt set
(QWNER OR PURCHA~R) OR All7NOR~2ED AGENT . 0Q
t declare tA~t i am Ike ❑ tmpaner a!record and that p+e sctual ovmer, E.Asceriained Total dQ. cial
, 00
pv2Reser, or cOnSigne~ for CBP purpp9es is as shown dbgvA, OR ~ owner
or purchaser or agent thereof. I further declare that Rhe merchandise • ~] was obta~rred pursuant to a purchase or pgreament to purcbaaa and that the
grio~s stt forth i1t t~9 ~wolCl3 Ato tru~f, OR ~] was naE obta►netl Outsu~ to a OWcE~ase or ~,yreemeM !a putdeate ~d the statements ~n the invoices as
to value ar price ire trot k► the ban oFmy kaavAecige and belief. 1 ado declaro the the s~efemee~ts ~n tie aocu+nent~ herein tYed fully disclose ~O the lsrast
of my knowtadge end Cefief the uue prices, values, quars~ies, rtbatss, drawbacks, fees, ummissbns. a+kf roya~ies ark are uue and corraa, s~ this all
goads ~ ~vkae provided to t1+e aetbr ct lAia merchandise eiltfer free cr et reduced cost ate fully ~sdosad.
w~l hr~r (urn~h to the aFR~~te CBP ofiCer any in#ormation showing a ~ffi~rent stat~morn a1 t~Ga
4. 1 U A
SAO H00 CUSTOHS BRO[CuR TNC.,A
a2. 1er t lt~ {N , address, phone number) •t3_ BroKedlmpc~[Ler File No.
SCE $04 CDSTOMS BROKER IIdC. 124857 AT
6440 CORVETTE STREET For Papenrror~c ReductiortA,el;nformatian elide below.
CO~MER~E, CA 90040 2135800083 _ CBP dorm 75 1 (OSI09)
~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 71 of 84 Page ID #:193
124957-01~ 06/12/ZU15
TO
PAYMENT IS DUB UPON RECEiFT
BALANCES NQ'I' RECEIVEfl W3THIN XOiFR
MQHAMAD Y AZCHARIHI TERM$ ARE SUBJECT TD 1.5$ INTEREST
36811 45TH ST EAST CHI~RGE PER MIONTH & ALL ATTORNEY
~c AI~MDALE CA 93552 FEES AND COLL~CTIdN COST
~. Asp is.aa
..
EFd7R'~ hJG. EC1TR'f ~JkTE
MESSENGER SERVICES 15.QA
~ ~ ■
I5E BOND 100. f10
A1RLItv~,`S~EAt.'SHlP ~ ARRI':F~l.!C:EPNh~TURE
~ ~
i FEDEX EXPRESS MAIL 35.00
~ ~ ~.
DROP CHARGES 70,00
RF:ti4t1RKS
~~
~ 1,f
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 72 of 84 Page ID #:194
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
Memorandum of Law
Re: FBI Warrant for Search and Seizure Served on Mr. Al Charihi
Date: 5/20/16
You left your card with our above referenced client when you and your fellow
FBI agents
raided his home at 36811 45~" Street, I°almdale CA 93552 on or about 3/19/1
G and took the items
that you listed on the copy of the Warrant for Seazch and Seizure that
was left with him. VVe do
not know what was told to the federal judge to have the Warrant issued
, but ari e~chaustive
investigation of the facts and the law show conclusively that (for the reason
s given below) you
have no case against him. The warrant should be quashed, the items returned
and there should be
no action taken against him. In short customs duties were paid. There was
no intent or attempt to
evade customs duties and introduce uninspected items into the United
States. No false or forged
documents were used to bring the items into the United States. It is believ
ed that this action has
been taken against him based on sheer Islamophobia and racism.
Statement of Facts
' The Client has been in the United States since 1996, for 20 years, he has a
wife and two sons ages 10 and $. He
operated another businesses before becoming involved in the sale ofartifacts. These
businesses are exporting cars and
working for his brother's print shop in the international department. He became
interested in importation and sales of
artifacts in about 3 years due to good connections and his knowledge of people working
in cheap labor departments
oforganizations involving artifacts. In Syria, his home country, he was a chemical
engineer who had one of his own
~'Z
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 73 of 84 Page ID #:195
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
"Client") a naturalized citizen of the United States, originally firom Syria, who
operates the
business of imparting, buying and selling ancient artifacts from overseas. ~Ie has been
operating
this business for 1(one) year and has never had a problem before naw with the govern
ment
regarding such business. ~Ie also operates another business which is buying salvaged cars
from
auto auctions, repairing them and shipping them to Africa. He also works in a print shop
and has
never had any issues there with authorities. He has never had any issues with the government
with
any respect to any business in which he has been involved. However, the "soap inciden
t"
mentioned in the foot note should be addressed in depth.
On or about December 23,2003 our Client was travelling from Manchester NH to Oaklan
d
CA.He had a flight connection in Washington DC.Once he had boarded the plane,two FBI
agents
approached him and asked him to go with them. They walked him offofthe plane.
As they walked
with him, they told him that the FBI had checked his luggage and found what looked
like soap,
but that it could be something else. The FBI stated that they thought it was TNT. They
asked him
to wait in a room for about 2 hours. He realized that his plane in Manchester had taken
off and that
he had missed his connection in Washington D.C.for his flight to Oakland. The FBI agent
put him
on a flight to Oakland, but with a connection in Chicago IL. When the Client arrived in Chicag
o,
tvva F$I agents were waiting for hirn at the date as he disembarked.'the two approached him end
asked ifhe was Mohamad. H~ said yes. They then told him to walk with them after they
introduced
themselves as FBI agents. Ike walked with them to the FBI office in the airport. 1hey
asked him
about 100 questions about his background, since elementary school through the moment
that they
met him by the gate.
Then they told him that they seized his soap and took it to the lab to do some tests.
He knew later
that the FBI seized some personal video types that he was carrying with him on that
trip. They told
him that they were holding him in the airport until the test result come back from the
lab. After 8
hours one of the agent entered the room and told him "1 have good news for you."
He told the
agent to go ahead and tell him. The agent told him that the soaps turned out to
be soap. ~'h~n he
told him he was going to put him an a flight to Oakland. The agent asked my
client to give him
an address in California. About 3 months later an F'BI agent came to the given address
and gave
him the seised video types and told him the FBI would not return the soap. I was held
for about 8
hours.
As to the raid in question, the FBI took a list of items, ancient artifacts, mosaics
, statues
and other precious figurines. They also took records, laptops, custom broker
receipts, bills of
lading, manifests, and other evidence of importation ofitems into the country.
A list of the items
patents registered and recognized in Syria and several other foreign countries when he was
ofcriminal misconduct. He was once stopped at an airport in 2003 with homemade soap. FBI only 19. He has no history
the soap being a bomb. ARer six hours of delay and his missing his flight he was told the soapfalsely accused him of
confiscated by the FBI anyway. was soap, but it was
~3
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 74 of 84 Page ID #:196
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
confiscated was liven to the Client as well as a copy of the warrant. They
FBI did not arrest the
Clint on the scene, but did convey that he was being investigated for smuggling.
The FBI also
broke into a safe owned by the Client and confiscated the documents that were inside.
Certain of
the documents confiscated from the safe had not been used in any manner to effect
a purchase and
sale or the importation of any items into country, including but not limited to a certain
mosaic in
which the FBI seemed to have extraordinary interest.
When an FBI agent questioned the Client on the scene the agent asked whethe
r a picture
of a certain item, a mosaic, had been sent to a prospective buyer. The Client did
not refuse to
answer the initial questions, though he was visibly shaken by the ordeal. He
did nat remember
whether he had sent a picture of the mosaic to the prospective buyer whom he rememb
ered came
to his location to inquire about the mosaic. The agent became hostile and bellige
rent and that is
when the Client told him that he would not feel comfortable answering
more questions until he
had consulted with legal counsel. After the raid he called a friend in Philade
lphia to inquire about
an attorney and that friend indicated that the international lawyer who he
had already told him
about(for assistance in the sale ofthe item) would be the lawyer whom
he should consult regarding
this FBI matter. The Client told his friend in Philadelphia to tell the attorne
y that he would ca11
him for a consultation. The attorney talked with the mutual friend from Philadelphia
and said he
would speak with the Client whenever he called. The Client called
the attorney, answered
questions, forwarded documents and engaged the attorney for the work to
resolve this matter with
the FBI.
~-y
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 75 of 84 Page ID #:197
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
question becomes whether there were proper grounds to issue a warrant for search
and seizure in
the first place.
Legal Analysis
Case Law
An exhaustive research of the case law shows that there can be no indictment
legally
brought against the Client. It is apparent that the government is headed in the wrong directi
on. The
case law has been very helpful in presenting facts and legal principles to assist the effort
ofshowing
that pursuit of an indictment is misplaced. The indictment must be ground in facts and
law that
show there has been a violation ofthe smuggling state. One ofthe statutes mentioned in
the warrant
is 18 USC Sec. 545:
"Sec. X45, Title 18 sets forth two different dimes:(1) Smuggling or clandestinely
introducing merchandise which should ha~~ been invoiced, and (2) Kna~ingly
importing or bringing into the United States merchandise contrary to law, withou
t
complying with other provisions of law, ..." Babb v. United States, S Cir.,1955,
218 F.2d 538.
As the above case points out, there is a vast difference between the two crimes
.
Smuggling or clandestinely introducing goods or using false or forged documents
on the one hand is "unlawful and evil per se,"(Babb. 218 F.2d at page 540) while
importing, bringing in, receiving etc., goods after importation is not evil per se but
is a crime because offailure to comply with other statutes. The two crimes set forth
in Section 545 can be traced back to two of the old Revised Statutes, smuggling
based on R.S. Sec. 2865 and importation based on R.S. 3082.E"United States
v. Claybourn,180 F. Supp. 448 -Dist. Court,SD California 1960,at page 452,3
If the government brings an indictment alleging that the defendant with intent to defrau
d
the United States "did knowingly end willfully smuggle and clandestinely
introduce into the
United States from a foreign country" the merchandise described in the indictment,
there will be a
major problem, since the shipping documents show that the customs duties
were paid and all
shipping documents were in order and all costs and expenses were properly paid.
3 The cited case has facts which are different. In Claybourn the defendant carried
merchandise in his automobile
across the International border from the United States to Mexico,then returned
with the same merchandise in the car,
and did nothing with the merchandise in Mexico. ~'he U. S. District Court for the
Southern District of California, San
Diego ruled that this set offacts did not violate 18 i.7SC Sec.545
~s
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 76 of 84 Page ID #:198
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
Since the word "smuggle" and the phrase "clandestinely introduce" mean substan
tially the
same thing viewed in the background of English common law, Keck v. United
States, 1899, 172
U.S. 434,19 S.Ct. 254,43 L.Ed. SOS and since they refer to the acts ofa defenda
tYt surreptitiously
and by concealment or fraud avoiding the customs and introducing goods into
the United States,
it is immediately apparent that where the facts show without dispute that a defend
ant properly paid
all customs duties and fees related to importing, that he was not smuggl
ing or clandestinely
introducing goods into the United States. The purpose ofthe statute is to preven
t the surreptitious,
clandestine or fraudulent entry of the goods into the United States.
The Matthews4 case is not helpful for our attempt to quash an indictment.
It is helpful,
however, in an attempt to get an acquittal at trial. It stands for the
proposition that when a
smuggling charge is subject to a motion for acquittal at trial, any other charge
should be subject to
said type of motion and that the motion should be presented in addition to
the acquittal motion for
smuggling.
A motion for acquittal was filed and granted in the smuggling case
United States v.
Kismetoglu, 350 F. Supp. 333 -Dist. Court, CD California 1971, where at
trial, the court had found
the defendant guilty of smuggling watches and jewelry into the states.
In a post-trial motion, the
district court held that this Armenian (traveling with his wife and family
) was not a professional
business man or an experienced traveler. T'he court said the grava
men of the offense was the
clandestine introduction into the United States with specific intent to
defraud the United States, of
~~
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 77 of 84 Page ID #:199
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
merchandise that should be declared to customs inspectors. The court granted the
motion for
acquittal. The court reasoned that he had no intention to clandestinely introduce into the
United
States the items (watches and jewelry) for the purpose of smuggling. He had packed
the items in
his belongings in order to avoid the secret police in his foreign home country confisc
ating his
belongings.
~'he problem with this case is that it has been marked far non-publication and for not
relying
on the case fnr precedent with some exceptions with respect to the appellate court
rules which have
been quoted below in this memorandum. It appears that this case comes within the
exception,
because the case in subsequent to the year quoted and the case is one involving smuggl
ing even
though this case is different on the facts. In the case of the Client, customs duties
were declared
and paid in the normal course of business. There was no attempt to evade any charges
by customs.
The goods were inspected and $560 USD in customs was paid for two mosaics and
$360 USD was
paid for a third mosaic. ALL CUSTOMS DUTIES WERE PAID for the items importe
d by the
Client.
CONCLUSION
It is clear from the research ofthe case law related to the statutes named in the Warran
t for
Search and Seizure that the elements for smuggling are not present in the case
ofthis Client. There
must be 1)an intent to commit the crime ofsmuggling,2)the actual evasion ofthe
customs duties
inspection, and 3)the failure to pay customs duties on the item imported. If
these(3)elements are
not a part of a smuggling case then there has been no violation of the
statute. It is clear from the
facts that the client paid customs duties on all items imported. ~Ie
imported a mosaic that was
unrestored and un-conserved along with other items. I~~ paid customs
duties on all items. After
~`' T
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 78 of 84 Page ID #:200
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
legal importation of all items, he paid $39,000 to have the mosaic restored by a specialist
from
New York. for those who know,the mosaic (in which the FBI has shown extraordinary
interest)
is the depiction of"The 11~' Labor of Hercules". phis mosaic gained value only after
restoration.
In the states the mosaic (after restoration) could be sold for $200,000 — $500,000. This
would be
based on the relative ignorance of the US purchaser whether it be an individual
collector, an
antiquities museum, a dealer, or an art shop which buys and sells artifacts and
antiquities. An
experienced and sophisticated buyer overseas who understands the meaning of
the now freshly
restored mosaic and its value has verbally offered more. Prospective collectors overse
as feel it has
more value than prospective buyers in the states. That information came days
after it was
confiscated in the raid by the FBI.
Based on the above case law this memorandum oflave has been developed to show
the ~B~
that under the facts and the law there has been no violation of the smuggling
statutes and it is a
waste of time to twist the facts in order to try to build a case against this Client.
The government
seized this mosaic and other items in error based on information that maybe found
to be unreliable.
FBI informants are not always trustworthy and reliable. It is suggested
by counsel that this
memorandum be transmitted to the office of the Assistant US Attorney
(AUSA). If there is
resistance to release the mosaic for any reason,counsel intends to file a
motion to quash the warrant
and have the items returned pursuant to the case law in this memor~n,dum.
Counsel has already
sought and secured local counsel licensed in federal court in California
who shall admit counsel
pro hac vice if and when necessary.
There is some concern that the Client has regarding certain docume
nts that were in his
locked safe and which were not used for importation of the items seized.
These docwnents were
seized by the FBI,after they broke into the locked safe. They did this before
he was ever summoned
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 79 of 84 Page ID #:201
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
to his house. They raided the home while he and his family were at a baby shower. They
searched
and seized items before the client and his family returned to the home. The
FBI had free reign in
the house with no one present. The Client feels that these documents may
be misconstrued and
may be improperly viewed as possibly incriminating. They were prepared
by the client. The
purpose was to mislead non-serious buyers and possible thieves who had already
begun to inquire
about the valuable mosaic, subsequent to its restoration. These non-serious buyers
and possible
thieves were persons about whom the Client was very concerned and suspicious.
The documents
were never used in a purchase, sales, or importation transaction. They were never
used at all.
The mere existence of these documents does not create smuggling liabilit
y for client,
because they were never used for any purpose let alone smuggling. No person
ever saw said
documents, besides the Client and they were never a part of an import
, sales or purchase
transaction. In fact the documents were drafted after the items seized by the
FBI had already been
imported into the LTS a.nd had already cleared customs.
Respectfully submitted,
~9
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 80 of 84 Page ID #:202
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
accessible electronic database, the party must file end serve ~ capy of
that opinion, order, judgment, ar disposition with the brief or other paper
in which it is cited.
(As added Apr. 12, 2006, eff. Dec. 1, 2006.)
r
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 81 of 84 Page ID #:203
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
Fraudulent or false invoice used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. comme
rce
any imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties
, OR
Fraudulent or false declaration used to enter or introduce into U.S. comme
rce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties
, OR
Fraudulent or false declaration used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S.
commerce
any imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties
, OR
Fraudulent or false affidavit used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce
any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties, OR
Fraudulent or false letter used to attempt to enter or introduce into U.S. comme
rce any
imported merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of lawful duties
, OR
Fraudulent or false paper used to enter or introduce into U.S. commerce
any imported
merchandise, and said act or omission deprives U.S. of I~wful duties, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S.,
a person
smuggles into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a person
attempts to smuggle into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been
invoiced, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.~., ~ person
clandestinely introduces into the U.S. any merchandise that should
have been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S.,
a person attempts to
clandestinely introduce into the U.S. any merchandise that should
have been invoiced,
OR
~ ~'l
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 82 of 84 Page ID #:204
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a perso
n makes
out at the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other
document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., a perso
n passes
through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other
document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the
U.S., a person
attempts to pass through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudu
lent invoice, or
other document or paper, OR
'~Z
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 83 of 84 Page ID #:205
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the
U.S., a person
smuggles into the U.S. any merchandise that should have been
invoiced, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S., perso
a n
attempts to smuggle into the U.S. any merchandise that should have
been invoiced, OIL
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S.,
a person
clandestinely introduces into the U.S. any merchandise that should have
been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a
person attempts to
clandestinely introduce into the U.S. any merchandise that should have
been invoiced,
OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud U.S., a
person makes
out at the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice, or other
document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the U.S.,
a person passes
through the customhouse any false, forged, or fraudulent invoice,
or other document or
paper, OR
While acting knowingly and willfully with the intent to defraud the
U.S., a person
attempts to pass through the customhouse any false, forged, or
fraudulent invoice, or
other document or paper, OR
,ar~`~3
Case 2:16-cv-07391-JFW-SS Document 1 Filed 10/03/16 Page 84 of 84 Page ID #:206
McKenzie, Wilkes & Mahmoud
A person receives merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person conceals merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the
U.S. contrary to law, OR
A person buys merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person sells merchandise knowing that it was imported or introduced into the U.S.
contrary to law, OR
A person facilitates the concealment of such merchandise after importation knowing that
it was imported or introduced into the U.S. contrary to law, OR
A person facilitates the sale of such merchandise after importation knowing that it was
i mported or introduced into the U.S. contrary to law.
~ ~~