In July of 2020, CBP agents seized $13,522 from a husband and wife who were traveling together for an international flight out of the Detroit Metropolitan Airport. Normally, you do not need to declare on the FinCEN 105 form the amount of cash that you are bringing into or out of the United States on an international flight unless you are carrying more than $10,000.

Although neither of them had more than $10,000 in their possession, CBP seized the money after alleging that the husband and wife distributed the money between them with the intent to evade the currency reporting requirement of Title 31, United States Code, Section 5316. After filing the verified claim for court action and showing all of the reasons that the seizure was unjustified, on October 16, 2020, we learned that the AUSA decided not to file a complaint. The check arrived on November 19, 2020.

On December 7, 2020, we received a letter from the Fines, Penalties and Forfeiture Officer concerning $48,660 in U.S. Currency that was seized at the Orlando Airport in September of 2020. The letter explains that “[a]fter review of the matter, the Government has decided to release the property to you.” The refund through direct deposit arrived on January 15, 2021.

In this case, we preserved surveillance video from the Orlando International Airport showing the problems with the detention from its inception. We also gathered all of the evidence showing why the funds came from a legitimate source and were intended for a legitimate purpose.

In September of 2020, officers with the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office and agents with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized $40,253 in U.S. Currency discovered during a routine traffic stop and arrest on an outstanding warrant. After preserving video and audio from the roadside investigation and at the police station, we filed a verified claim for court action on October 20, 2020, which triggered the 90 day deadline for the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court. Instead of filing the complaint, on February 2, 2021, we received a letter from CBP that indicated: “After a review of the matter, the Government has decided to release the property to you.”

In September of 2020, CBP seized $18,442.00 at the San Ysidro Border Crossing near San Diego, California. Shortly after being retained, we filed a verified claim. Shortly after filing the claim, we were contacted by a Senior Attorney with CBP’s Office of Assistant Chief Counsel. Based on the documents we submitted, CBP’s Senior Attorney agreed that the circumstances justified a pre-civil settlement in which $17,000 would be refunded to our clients.

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) records, our clients, a husband and wife, were questioned as they were departing the United States at the San Ysidro Border Crossing. In response to being asked whether either was transporting more than $10,000 in U.S. currency or monetary instruments, each reported carrying $8,000. Upon further inspection, officers discovered a total of $18,442, which CBP claimed belonged to the husband. CBP alleged that the husband divided the money to avoid the currency reporting requirement.

The CBP officers claimed they didn’t need probable cause, nor reasonable suspicion to search persons, baggage, or conveyances crossing the  international border for either inbound and outbound border crossings. The currency in this case was not seized with regard to its source and/or use. Rather, it was seized for non-compliance with 31 U.S.C. 5316, which requires an individual to report the transportation of currency over $10,000.00.

Willful failure to report the actual amount over $10,000 in currency is a crime punishable by up to five years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and forfeiture of the currency. (See 31 U.S.C. 5317 & 5322.) Dividing money among multiple travelers so that no single traveler is carrying more than $10,000, is in fact a separate crime commonly known as structuring, and is punishable by up to five years in prison, and a $250,000 fine. (See 31 U.S.C. 5324.)

Nevertheless, neither of our clients were charged with a crime and CBP agreed to return $17,000 to them on February 8, 2021, if they agreed to withdraw their requests that judicial forfeiture proceedings be commenced against the Currency. The balance of $1,442 was retained by the government as a payment in lieu of forfeiture.

In September of 2020, agents with CBP seized $17,280 from a traveler at the Orlando International Airport. Shortly after we were retained, we preserved all of the surveillance videos of the initial detention from the Orlando Aviation Authority. After filing a verified claim, we presented information to CBP about the illegality of the initial detention, search, and seizure. The CBP ultimately decided to return all of the funds seized.

In September of 2020, DEA seized $47,000 from our client at the Newark Liberty International Airport. Shortly after we were retained, we took steps to preserve any surveillance video of the initial detention from the Port Authority. We then filed a verified claim for court action and provided information about problems with the legality of the initial detention. The Assistant United States Attorney decided not to file a complaint within the 90 day deadline. The funds were returned shortly thereafter.

In October of 2020, DEA seized $18,000 at the Jacksonville International Airport. After requesting the video of the initial detention, we filed a verified claim for court action. On April 12, 2021, DEA agreed to return the funds. The money arrived at our office on April 28, 2021.

In October 2020, a DEA Special Agent seized more than $36,000 from our client at the JFK International Airport. We took steps to preserve the video of our client’s initial detention by TSA at the checkpoint and later detention by DEA at the gate. After filing a verified claim for court action, we were contacted by an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) at the Asset Forfeiture Unit for the Eastern District of New York. After showing problems with the legality of the initial detention, the AUSA failed to file a complaint within the 90-day deadline, and the DEA returned the seized funds shortly thereafter.

In October 2020, the DEA seized $18,000 from a traveler at the Jacksonville International Airport. Shortly after being retained, we took steps to preserve the video of the initial detention from the JAA Internal Auditor. We then filed a verified claim for court action. After the Assistant United States Attorney failed to file a complaint for forfeiture within the 90 day deadline, all seized funds were returned in April of 2021.

In October 2020, DEA seized more than $78,000 from a traveler at the JFK International Airport. After we were retained, we took steps to preserve any surveillance video of the initial detention. After filing a verified claim for court action, a Senior Law Clerk with the Forfeiture Support Associates, LLC, contacted us to find out whether we would be amenable to a CAFRA extension to see if the case could be resolved prior to the filing of a complaint. We declined this invitation but provided information showing problems with how the initial detention occurred. We were then contacted by an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) with the Asset Forfeiture Unit in the Eastern District of New York. Ultimately, the AUSA failed to file the complaint within the 90 day deadline, and the funds were returned shortly thereafter.

On October 18, 2020, an agent with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized $30,830.00 from our client at the Dallas/Ft. Worth (DFW) Airport. Before hiring our firm, the client attempted to file a pro se claim, but received correspondence from D.M. Nichols, Fines, Penalties & Forfeiture Officer and Paralegal Specialist Steven M. McGuirk at the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport.

The letter claimed that the initial claim filed by the client on a pro se basis appeared to be “in conflict” about whether an administrative or judicial proceeding was being requested. After we were retained, we filed a second verified claim for court action on the client’s behalf, which CBP received on December 30, 2020.

More than 90 days later, the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) filed a complaint for forfeiture in the Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas Dallas. We provided proof that the 90 day CAFRA deadline was missed. CPB agreed to return the money and the AUSA then filed a Motion for Voluntary Dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. R. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The motion explained:

“This dismissal is based on the untimely nature of the complaint, filed more than 90 days after an initial claim was made to Customs and Border Patrol for the $30,830 in question. Plaintiff has spoken with counsel for the Claimant of the $30,830 and understands there are no objections to this dismissal.”

On September 17, 2020, FBI agents seized $24,905.00 in United States Currency from our client at the Luis Munoz Marin International Airport in San Juan, Puerto Rico. According to the receipt, the money was seized for forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 881. We filed a verified claim online on January 4, 2021.

The Assistant United States Attorney then waited 92 days to file a Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem. After showing proof to the AUSA that the complaint was filed outside of the 90-day deadline imposed by CAFRA, the FBI agreed to return 100% of the money seized to our office. On May 6, 2021, the AUSA then filed a voluntary dismissal of the complaint with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

Keep in mind that you are not required to fill out a FinCEN Form 105 if you bring more than $10,000 cash into or out of Puerto Rico or the Luis Munoz Marin International Airport since it is not classified as “outside of the United States” or “a foreign country” for purposes of the reporting requirements (the same is true for the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Territory of the Pacific Islands).

Although you can carry over $10,000 cash on a flight to Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands without needing to fill out a FinCEN Form 105, federal agents monitor individuals traveling to those locations more carefully, especially when they are suspected of transporting bulk currency.