`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`USA,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LAZARENKO,
`
`Case No. 00-cr-00284-CRB-1
`
`
`ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
`CORRECT PRELIMINARY ORDER OF
`FORFEITURE
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`In concluding that the government could forfeit up to $2,283,602.80 in funds held in
`
`Defendant Pavel Lazarenko’s Bank Julius Baer (BJB) Guernsey account and
`
`Liechtensteinische Landesbank AG (NRKTO) account, the Court stated that Lazarenko
`
`had diminished the value of his Novato, California mansion by at least $250,000 based on
`
`the cost of repairs. See Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (dkt. 1743) at 6 & n.6. As the
`
`government now points out, the Court’s reading of the record understated the amount by
`
`which Lazarenko diminished the mansion’s value. The appraised value of the property
`
`was $4,800,000. See id. at 5 (citing Appraisal (dkt. 1738-1) at Appx. 121). The estimated
`
`cost of necessary repairs (which were not performed) was $1,010,900. See Armstrong
`
`Decl. (dkt. 1738-3) at 3–4. Thus, with the repairs, the property would have had a value of
`
`$5,810,900. The property sold for $5,050,000. See Preliminary Order of Forfeiture at 6
`
`(citing Return on Final Order of Forfeiture (dkt. 1674)). Accordingly, the Court concludes
`
`that Lazarenko diminished the value of the Novato mansion by at least $760,900—the
`
`difference between the mansion’s sale price and its estimated value had the repairs been
`
`performed. The government is entitled to forfeit up to $2,794,502.80 in funds held in the
`
`BJB Guernsey and NRKTO accounts. The preliminary order of forfeiture is hereby
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:00-cr-00284-CRB Document 1748 Filed 08/20/21 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`amended consistent with that determination (the Court otherwise retains and incorporates
`
`its reasoning and conclusions from that order).
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the government has now established by a preponderance
`
`of the evidence that all funds frozen in:
`
`a. Bank Julius Baer & Company, Ltd., Guernsey Branch in Guernsey, Channel
`
`Islands (identified by its number ending in -3445) held in the name of or for
`
`the benefit of Pavel Lazarenko (the BJB Funds); and
`
`b. Liechtensteinische Landesbank AG in Liechtenstein (identified by its number
`
`ending in NRKTO 7541) held in the name of or for the benefit of
`
`Pavel Lazarenko (the NRKTO Funds);
`
`(the subject property) is the defendant’s property, and, as a result, the subject property (up
`
`to $2,794,502.80) can be forfeited as substitute property and applied against the
`
`$22,851,000 money judgment.
`
`Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons and pursuant to Rule 32.2(e) of the Federal
`
`Rules of Criminal Procedure,
`
`
`
`IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Money Judgment and Supplemental
`
`Preliminary Order of Forfeiture entered on September 29, 2006 (dkt. 1080), is amended to
`
`include the subject property;
`
`
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the government may conduct discovery in order
`
`to identify, locate, or dispose of property subject to forfeiture in accordance with Rule
`
`32.2(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure;
`
`
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant, Pavel Lazarenko, shall execute
`
`such documents and take such steps as may be necessary to facilitate the transfer of the
`
`BJB Funds and the NRKTO Funds to the United States, or the seizure or restraint of these
`
`assets, including through the withdrawal of any objections in foreign proceedings and the
`
`execution of any documents as the United States may direct that may facilitate the
`
`continued restraint, seizure, or transfer of these assets to the United States;
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States, through its appropriate agency,
`
`2
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:00-cr-00284-CRB Document 1748 Filed 08/20/21 Page 3 of 3
`Case 3:00-cr-00284-CRB Document 1748 Filed 08/20/21 Page 3 of 3
`
`ole
`>WwW
`
`CoOoSNDnAN
`
`shall publish on www.forfeiture.gov, a government website, forat least thirty days, notice
`
`of this Order and notice of the government’sintent to dispose of the property in such
`
`manneras the Attorney General may direct, and shall provide notice that any person, other
`
`than the defendant, having orclaiminga legalinterest in the property, mustfile a petition
`
`with the Court and serve a copy on government counsel within (30) days of the final
`
`publication of notice or of receipt of actual notice, whicheveris earlier. This notice shall
`
`state that the petition shall be for a hearing to adjudicate the validity of the petitioner’s
`
`alleged interest in the property, shall be signed by the petitioner under penalty of perjury
`
`and shall set forth the nature and extent of the petitioner’s right, title or interest in the
`
`forfeited property and any additional facts supporting the petitioner’s claim andtherelief
`
`sought. The United States may also, to the extent practicable, provide direct written notice
`
`to any person known to have alleged an interest in the Subject Property, as a substitute for
`
`published notice as to those personsso notified;
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDEREDthat the court maintain jurisdiction to enforce the
`
`Preliminary Order of Forfeiture, and to amendit as necessary, pursuant to Rule 32.2(e) of
`
`the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDEREDthat, pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(4) of the Federal
`
`Criminal Rules of Procedure, this Preliminary Order of Forfeiture is final as to the
`
`
`
`NorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`defendant upon entry.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: August 20, 2021
`
`LE
`
`CHARLES R. BREYER
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrictCourt
`
`
`
`
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site