Saddozai v. American Contractors Indemnity Company

seized property or property subject to forfeiture other than persons designated in a receipt issued for the property seized.’ (Id., § 11488.4, subd. (c).) Finally, notice of a forfeiture action must be published once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county of seizure. (Id., § 11488.4, subd. (e).)” (People v. Mendocino County Assessor’s Parcel No. 056- 500-09 (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 120, 125.)

Here, Petitioner has provided evidence showing notice of these proceedings was duly given. Mavromatis is the only person identified in the receipt for the seized property and Petitioner provided evidence showing he was personally served with the petition of forfeiture and with notice of the seizure and intended forfeiture proceeding along with instructions for filing a claim. Mavromatis’ wife and brother both signed a “Disclaimer of Ownership and Waiver of Notice” pertaining to the seized property. Petitioner also provided proof showing notice of the forfeiture action was given by publication as required by Health & Safety Code section 11488.4, subdivision (e). Mavromatis was also served with a copy of this motion by mail.

No claim has been filed by any party asserting any interest in the seized property. Based on the uncontroverted declaration of Irvine Police Department Detective Ryan Smith #624, the court finds Petitioner has established a prima facie case in support of its petition for forfeiture, and therefore Petitioner is entitled to a default judgment of forfeiture.

Based on the foregoing, the motion is GRANTED.

The court will sign the proposed judgment submitted by Petitioner.

Petitioner’s counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

9. Saddozai v. CONTINUED to September 17, 2026, as stated in the American September 4, 2026 Minute Order. Contractors Indemnity Company

10. Kaiser Before the court is the continued hearing on the following Foundation three motions to seal: (1) motion to seal portions of the Health Plan vs. opposition brief and supporting documents respondents Sharp Sharp Memorial Hospital, Sharp Coronado Hospital & Healthcare Center, Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center, and Grossmont Hospital Corporation dba Sharp Grossmont