Marron v. Moros

• Docket Number: 21-23190-CIV-MORENO
• Decision Date: 07 October 2024
• Parties: CARLOS EDUARDO MARRON, MARIA MARRON, C.R., a minor, and S.A., a minor, Plaintiffs, v. NICOLAS. MADURO MOROS, FUERZAS ARMADAS REVOLUCIONARIOS DE COLOMBIA, CARTEL OF THE SUNS, VLADIMIR PADRINO LOPEZ, MAIKEL JOSE MORENO PEREZ, NESTOR LUIS REVEROL TORRES, TAREK WILLIAM . SAAB, and TARECK EL AISSAMI, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida

1

CARLOS EDUARDO MARRON, MARIA MARRON, C.R., a minor, and S.A., a minor, Plaintiffs, v. NICOLAS. MADURO MOROS, FUERZAS ARMADAS REVOLUCIONARIOS DE COLOMBIA, CARTEL OF THE SUNS, VLADIMIR PADRINO LOPEZ, MAIKEL JOSE MORENO PEREZ, NESTOR LUIS REVEROL TORRES, TAREK WILLIAM . SAAB, and TARECK EL AISSAMI, Defendants.

No. 21-23190-CIV-MORENO

United States District Court, S.D. Florida, Miami Division

October 7, 2024

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON TRIA CLAIM

FEDERICO A..MOREYO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment against Samark Lopez Bello and his Shell Companies (D.E. 201) and Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment against FRYD Mortgage LLC(D.E. 206).Samark Lopez Bello and his shell companies failed to file a response in opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion (D.E. 201) and the time do so has since passed.FRYD Mortgage LLC has withdrawn its opposition to the Plaintiffs' second Motion for Summary Judgment(D.E. 206, 249).LocalRule 56.1(a) provides that “[a]motion for summary judgment and the opposition to it shall each be accompanied by a separate . . . Statement of Material Facts . . .” which “shall list the material facts that the movant contends are not genuinely disputed.”S.D. Fla. L.R. 56.1(a)(1)., Where, as here there is no opposition . memorandum and non-movants fail to file a Statement of Material Facts in Opposition “[a]ll materials in [the moving]party's Statement of Material Facts may be deemed admitted . . S.D. Fla. 56.1(c);see alsoJones v. Gerwens,874 F.2d 1534, 1537 n.3(11th Cir.1989)(“[f]acts set forth in the Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts which are not controverted, are deemed admitted” pursuant to Local Rules).Therefore, Plaintiffs' Motions are now ripe for disposition.

The Court, however, is not permitted to grant the motions solely because they are unopposed.United States v. One Piece of Real Prop. Located at 5800 S. W. 74th Ave., Miami, Fla.,363 F.3d 1099, 1101(11th Cir.2004)(“[T]he district court cannot base the entry of summary judgment on the mere fact that the motion was unopposed, but, rather, must consider the merits of the motion.”). “[T]he district court need not sua sponte review all of the evidentiary . materials on file at the time the motion is granted, but must ensure that the motion itself is supported by evidentiary materials.”Reese v. Herbert, STI F.3d 1253, 1269 (11th Cir. 2008).“At the least, the district court must review all of the evidentiary materials submitted in support of the motion for summary judgment.”Id.

Nevertheless, after careful consideration of the motions, relevant authority, and for the reasons set forth in this Order, the Court finds there are no genuine issues of material fact and GRANTS the Plaintiffs' Motions for Summary Judgment.

I.Background

Plaintiffs initiated this case against the Defendants, including Tarek El Aissami and the Cartel of the Suns,, alleging violations of the Federal Anti-Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2333; the Florida Anti-Terrorism Act, Fla. Stat. § 772.13, Federal Civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), Conspiracy to Violate Federal Civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), and several state-law claims based on the Defendants' orchestrating the kidnapping, torture, and defamation of PlaintiffCarlos Marron, the extortion of PlaintiffMaria Marron, and the infliction of emotional distress on all Plaintiffs.On February 14, 2023, this Court awarded Plaintiffs a final judgment in the amount of $153,843,976.

After obtaining the judgment, Plaintiffs commenced collection proceedings under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) as to two properties owned by Limited Liability Companies operated by Samark Lopez Bello, who Plaintiffs claim is an agent and instrumentality of DefendantsTarek El Aissami and the Cartel of the Suns.See§ 201(a) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-297, § 201(a),116 Stat. 2322, 2337.^[1]One property is a home in Pinecrest, Florida and the other is a Miami Beach condominium.Plaintiffs moved for writs of execution as to the properties.On September 29, 2023, the Court . entered an order finding that Plaintiffs met their burden of making a prima facie showing on all of the elements necessary to satisfy TRIA, including that Lopez Bello is an agency or instrumentality of at least judgment debtor El Aissami and the Court emphasized that although it was issuing the writ of execution, it was retaining jurisdiction to give Lopez Bello and his shell companies an opportunity to make legal and factual challenges to the agency and instrumentality determination.In the same order, the Court granted a writ of execution on the Pinecrest property and required any party to move to quash and provide evidence in support of the motion by October 19, 2023.After determining that third partyLa Goree Palace Condominium Association had a special Office of Foreign Asset Control(OFAC) license permitting the sale of the Miami Beach property, the Court ordered the excess proceeds of the sale into a blocked account at First Horizon Bank.The Court issued Plaintiffs a writ on these blocked proceeds.Plaintiffs then moved for a writ of garnishment on Lopez Bello's blocked Banesco USA account, which the Court granted on February 1, 2024.Lopez Bello moved to vacate the writs as to the Pinecrest property, the proceeds from the Miami Beach property, and Banesco USA account, which the Court denied, on March 21, 2024 with leave to refile as summary judgment motions.

A.Agency and Instrumentality Issue

Plaintiffs are now moving for summary judgment on their TRIA claim, including seeking a determination that Samark Lopez Bello is an agent and instrumentality of DefendantTarek El Aissami and the Cartel of the Suns.In support of their first motion for summary judgment against Samark Lopez Bello, Plaintiffs cite to record evidence that DefendantTarek El Aissami . is the leader of the Defendant Cartel of the Suns.Plaintiffs proffered the affidavit of Luis Miguel Cote Gomez, who is a retired Colonel in the Colombian Marine Corps who served 31 years working on the implementation of intelligence against terrorist groups and the global criminal system of drug trafficking.He testified that the “Cartel of the Suns continues to thrive today under the leadership of Venezuela's Vice President Tarek El Aissami and his front man -Samark Lopez Bello[.]”The United States Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Lopez Bello as a Specially Designated Narcotics Trafficker on February 13, 2017.OFAC issued a press release to advise that it was designating Tarek El Aissami and his “front man”Samark Lopez Bello and blocking their assets (and those of any of their shell companies) in the United States.The OFAC designation states that Lopez Bello“handles business arrangements, and financial matters for El Aissami, generating significant profits as a result .of illegal activity benefitting El Aissami.”The OFAC designation also states that “[a]s a result of today's action, significant real property and other assets in Miami, Florida area tied to Lopez Bello have been blocked.”To support the agency and instrumentality determination, Plaintiffs also proffered the declaration of Special Agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration Paul Craine, who states that “Lopez Bello oversees an international network of companies which he utilizes to launder drug proceeds on behalf of El Aissami and to purchase properties.”As further support for the agency and instrumentality designation, the Plaintiffs cite the indictment in the Southern District of New York charging Lopez Bello with evading sanctions under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, 21 U.S.C. § 1901, and conspiring with El Aissami to evade sanctions.Finally,, Plaintiffs also proffer the affidavit of Douglas C. Farah, who is the President of IBI Consultants LLC, which is contracted to investigate, research and write unclassified work products on Counternarcotics and Global Threats.Farah is recognized by the United States Department of Defense as an expert on illicit drug trafficking and the relationship among global terrorist groups.Ele states in his affidavit that Tarek El Aissami and Samark Lopez Bello, among others, are members of the Cartel of the Suns, a criminal organization that materially assists and provides financial support to the international narcotics trafficking activities of the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (the FARC).

Lopez Bello has not responded to the Plaintiffs' Statement of Material Facts, which outlines his activities and it is Plaintiffs' position that these facts are sufficient to establish their TRIA claim including Lopez Bello's role as an agent and instrumentality of Tarek El Aissami, B. Pinecrest Property

At issue in Plaintiffs' second motion for summary judgment against FRYD Mortgage LLC is a home located at 9000 S.W. 63rd Court, Pinecrest, Florida.The property is owned by an LLC operated by Samark Lopez Bello.Plaintiffs claim they are entitled to recover their judgment against this property under TRIA, but there is a competing claimant on the property, the mortgagor, FRYD Mortgage, who is the plaintiff in a state court foreclosure proceeding against the property.SeeFrydMortgage, LLC v. 9000 S.W. 63rdCourt, LLC, &amp Maria Lopez,No. 2020-016686-CA-Ol (11th Jud. Cir. Ct.).FRYD Mortgage originally opposed the motion arguing that the Plaintiffs could not recover under TRIA against the property because Lopez Bello gifted the property to his daughter, and therefore, it was not OF AC-blocked.FRYD has since withdrawn its opposition to the motion for summary judgment.There being no opposition to the motion...