United States of America v. John Kane

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JOHN KANE,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-10181
D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00022-MMD
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Miranda M. Du, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
John Kane appeals the district court’s order declining to exercise equitable
jurisdiction over his motion for return of property under Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 41(g). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
FEB 21 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

Kane contends that the district court erred in declining to exercise equitable
jurisdiction over his motion for the return of $27,000 seized by the Nevada
Gaming Control Board. We review a district court’s decision whether to exercise
its equitable jurisdiction under Rule 41(g) for abuse of discretion. See Ramsden v.
United States, 2 F.3d 322, 324 (9th Cir. 1993). After observing that the property
was not seized by an agency of the federal government and that Kane would not
suffer irreparable injury from the denial of the motion because he has an adequate
remedy under state law, the court held that the equities did not tilt in favor of
reaching the merits of Kane’s motion. See id. at 325. The district court did not
abuse its discretion in declining to exercise equitable jurisdiction.
AFFIRMED.
16-10181 2

-- 2 of 2 --