United States v. Ninety-Five Firearms, Described in Exhibit A, and Curtis F. White, Claimant-Appellant

Opinion by Judge TANG.

Curtis White (“White”), a licensed firearms dealer, appeals the forfeiture of ninety-five firearms seized by the Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms Service (“ATF”). The seizure and forfeiture resulted from White’s failure to maintain and retain firearms records. White argues that the statute and the regulation that required him to maintain and retain the records, 18 U.S.C. § 923 (g)(1)(A) and 27 C.F.R. § 178.121 (a), are unconstitutionally vague. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

BACKGROUND

White owned and operated a licensed firearms business both from his home and from his liquor store in Fresno, California. In February of 1990, the ATF initiated an undercover investigation of White’s firearms business. During the course of the investigation White informed undercover ATF agents that he would sell firearms to convicted felons and would falsify ATF records to do so. The undercover operation concluded on September 5, 1990, with White’s arrest.

Pursuant to a search warrant, ATF agents conducted searches both of White’s home and his liquor store. A search of the liquor store uncovered an acquisition and disposition record (“A & D record”),…