Brandon Pert v. United States

MEMORANDUM

Brandon Mulford Pert appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint in which he sought to attack the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (“DEA”) forfeiture of money that he had in his automobile when he was stopped by the police. We affirm.

(1) The DEA gave Pert, and his counsel, notice that administrative forfeiture proceedings were underway. See 18 U.S.C. § 983 (a)(Z)(A)(i), (iv); 19 U.S.C. § 1607 (a); 21 U.S.C. § 881 (d). He was informed that he could either petition the DEA for remission or mitigation, or file a claim with it, by a designated date. If the former is filed, the administrative forfeiture proceedings go forward; but if the latter is filed, judicial proceedings are invoked. Pert did file a document with the DEA and we agree with the DEA and the district court that his filing was a petition for remission. Among other things, the document specifically asked for remission. When the DEA referred to it as a “Petition for Remission or Mitigation,” Pert did not inform the agency that his filing was not in fact a petition, but, rather, reasserted a demand for remission and cited remission regulations. Pert could not obtain judicial review of the…