It’s All in the Details When Stating a Claim
It’s All in the Details When Stating a Claim
Written By: Lisa Grose
Edited By: Andrew Lifsey
United States v. Two Land Rover Defenders, 2015 WL 4603271 (D.S.C. July 29, 2015), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98836 (D.S.C. July 8, 2015).Acting pro se, Mr. Wattiker sought to have an in rem civil action against his two Land Rover Defenders brought by the United States dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Customs and Border Patrol (hereinafter “CBP”) seized the two Land Rovers on February 13, 2013, roughly a month after “[Wattiker] attempted to import [the] vehicles into the United States through the Port of Charleston, South Carolina.” CBP alleged the vehicles did not comply with motor safety standards or emission requirements for the U.S. Wattiker filed exemptions claiming the vehicles were more than twenty-five years old.Upon further investigation by CBP, the vehicles were found to be pieced together with parts from different years and models of Land Rovers, were missing vehicle identification number (VIN) tags and engravings, contained VIN tags from other vehicles, and the original VIN frame etchings were obliterated, among other discrepancies.Wattiker claimed: failure to state a claim, laches, and violation of due process rights.In Judge Baker’s review she found that his arguments were “based largely on misapprehensions of law and mischaracterizations of fact.”The bottom line question on review was “whether the Amended Complaint sufficiently state[d] cognizable claims for forfeiture,” not under Rule 12(b), but instead under Fed. R. Civ. P. G(2)(f) of the Supplemental Rules, which explains the complaint must “state sufficiently detailed facts to support a reasonable belief that the government will be able to meet its burden of proof at trial.”Baker held that where “the Amended Complaint is sufficiently clear and does not require him to ‘guess’ at the causes of action or pertinent facts,” the motion for dismissal must be denied based on Rule G(2)(f) because “[t]he Amended Complaint sufficiently state[d] claims for relief.”
