United States v. $22,000.00 in U.S. Currency, and Howard Neu Ingram, Jr.

62 F.3d 1426 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. $22,000.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, Defendant, and Howard Neu Ingram, Jr., Appellant. No. 94-16855. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 2, 1995. * Decided Aug. 7, 1995. Before: ALARCON, FERNANDEZ, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Howard Neu Ingram, Jr., a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to vacate the civil forfeiture default judgment, and his Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e) motion for return of $22,000.00 in U.S. Currency. Ingram contends that the district court erred by finding that it lacked jurisdiction over the $22,000.00 and that Ingram had not met the burden for setting aside a default judgment under Rule 60(b). 1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. I. Jurisdiction 3 The government contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the…