United States of America v. Four Firearms

Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: Four Firearms
Case Number: 3:2007cv01970
Filed: October 11, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: San Diego Office
County: San Diego
Presiding Judge: William Q. Hayes
Presiding Judge: Nita L. Stormes
Nature of Suit: Forfeit/Penalty: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Complaint for Forfeiture
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 18, 2007 Filing 3 ORDER Appointing Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives As Substitute Cudstodian (re 2). Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 10/16/07. (mdc)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. Four Firearms
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: United States of America
Represented By: Mary C. Lundberg
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Four Firearms
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?