Docket Nexus — Federal court records.
Forfeiture / Penalty Lawsuit

Interceramic, U.S.A v. USA

Forfeiture / Penalty Terminated 02/16/1996 District Court, W.D. Texas

Interceramic, U.S.A v. USA is a federal forfeiture / penalty lawsuit filed on 01/31/1996 in the District Court, W.D. Texas. The case was terminated on 02/16/1996.

A lawsuit records allegations and procedural activity. Being named as a party does not establish liability, wrongdoing, or the merits of any claim.

Court
District Court, W.D. Texas (W.D. Tex.)
Official Court Website →
Docket number
Nature of suit
690 Other forfeiture and penalty suits
Other civil forfeiture or federal penalty actions.
Jurisdiction
Government defendant
Date filed
01/31/1996
Date terminated
02/16/1996

278 Forfeiture / Penalty cases in this court are indexed here.

Parties

About Forfeiture / Penalty Lawsuits

Forfeiture and penalty cases involve the government seeking to seize property connected to alleged unlawful activity, or the imposition of federal civil penalties.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Interceramic, U.S.A v. USA?

Interceramic, U.S.A v. USA is a federal forfeiture / penalty lawsuit filed on 01/31/1996 in the District Court, W.D. Texas. The case was terminated on 02/16/1996. Forfeiture and penalty cases involve the government seeking to seize property connected to alleged unlawful activity, or the imposition of federal civil penalties.

What type of case is this?

It is classified as “Forfeiture / Penalty” under the federal nature-of-suit system. Forfeiture and penalty cases involve the government seeking to seize property connected to alleged unlawful activity, or the imposition of federal civil penalties.

What court is the case in?

The case is in the District Court, W.D. Texas.

When was the case filed?

Interceramic, U.S.A v. USA was filed on 01/31/1996. It was terminated on 02/16/1996.

Related Forfeiture / Penalty Cases

Source: public U.S. federal court record — docket 62738958 in the CourtListener/RECAP archive (verify this docket). Court, party, date and judge fields are reproduced from that record; case-type categories, statute decoding and all aggregate figures are derived by Docket Nexus (methodology).