ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO RULE 41(g) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF… — USA v. Kao (Dkt. 92)

Summary

An order granting PacMar Technologies LLC's motion for return of property under Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, filed February 15, 2023 as Document 92 in United States v. Martin Kao, CR. NO. 21-00061 LEK, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii. It recites a hearing on February 14, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. before the Honorable Rom Trader, with Jesse W. Schiel appearing for PacMar and Craig S. Nolan for the Government. The order finds that the company cellphone and its data are PacMar's property and that Kao has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the data. The Government shall retain the cellphone and return a copy of the data to PacMar within thirty (30) days. If Kao files a timely objection, the Court will stay execution pending the District Court's disposition.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

1 
KOBAYASHI SUGITA & GODA, LLP 
DAVID M. LOUIE 
 
2162 
JESSE W. SCHIEL 
 
7995 
First Hawaiian Center 
999 Bishop Street, Suite 2600 
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 
Telephone: (808) 535-5700 
Facsimile: (808) 535-5799 
E-mail: 
dml@ksglaw.com; 
jws@ksglaw.com 
 
Attorneys for Movant 
PACMAR TECHNOLOGIES LLC f/k/a 
MARTIN DEFENSE GROUP, LLC f/k/a 
NAVATEK LLC 
 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 
 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
 
vs. 
 
MARTIN KAO, 
 
 
 
Defendant. 
CR. NO. 21-00061 LEK 
 
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 
RETURN OF PROPERTY 
PURSUANT TO RULE 41(g) OF THE 
FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL 
PROCEDURE 
 
 
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO 
RULE 41(g) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 
 
PACMAR TECHNOLOGIES LLC f/k/a MARTIN DEFENSE GROUP, LLC 
f/k/a NAVATEK LLC’S (“PacMar” or the “Company”) MOTION FOR RETURN 
OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO RULE 41(g) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF 
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK     Document 92     Filed 02/15/23     Page 1 of 3  PageID.532

2 
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (the “Motion”) came on for hearing on February 14, 
2023 at 9:30 a.m. before the Honorable Rom Trader.  Jesse W. Schiel appeared for 
Movant PacMar, Craig S. Nolan appeared for Plaintiff UNITED STATES (the 
“Government”), and Victor J. Bakke and Michael Okazaki appeared for Defendant 
MARTIN KAO (“Defendant Kao”). 
Having considered the Motion, the Memorandum in Opposition filed by 
Defendant Kao [Dkt. No. 89], the Government’s Response to the Motion [Dkt. No. 
84, hereinafter the “Government’s Response”], PacMar’s Reply in Support of the 
Motion [Dkt. No. 90], the arguments of counsel at the hearing on this matter, the 
records and files herein, and for the reasons set forth on the record during the hearing, 
the COURT hereby FINDS AND ORDERS as follows: 
1. 
The Motion is GRANTED; 
2. 
The Court adopts the arguments and authorities relied upon by PacMar 
and finds that the cellular phone previously issued by PacMar to Defendant Kao 
during his 
employment with 
Pacmar, 
Apple 
iPhone 
11 
Pro 
(IMEI 
353247100759018) (the “Company Cellphone”), and all of the business and 
personal data stored therein (hereinafter the “Cellphone Data”), are the property of 
PacMar pursuant to PacMar’s policies which were acknowledged by Defendant Kao 
and that Defendant Kao has no reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to the 
Cellphone Data. 
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK     Document 92     Filed 02/15/23     Page 2 of 3  PageID.533

3 
3. 
Having found that PacMar is the owner of the Company Cellphone and 
Cellphone Data, the Court further finds that PacMar has met the requirements under 
Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for the return of its property 
and is therefore entitled to the Government’s return of the Cellphone Data under 
Rule 41(g);  
4. 
Pursuant to the representations made in the Government’s Response, 
the Government shall retain the Company Cellphone, and a copy of the entirety of 
the Cellphone Data shall be returned to PacMar within thirty (30) days; and 
5. 
Should Defendant Kao file a timely objection to this order, the Court 
will stay the execution of this order pending the District Court’s disposition of the 
objection. 
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, February 15, 2023. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CR. NO. 21-00061 LEK; United States of America vs. Martin Kao; ORDER 
GRANTING MOTION FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO RULE 
41(g) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 
Rom A. Trader 
United States Magistrate Judge 
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEK     Document 92     Filed 02/15/23     Page 3 of 3  PageID.534

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.hid.154418.92.0.pdf

Size

317,075 bytes

SHA-256

278863571f9b65bc5d0484f6fa2324a272fd6fc41a5a13c168820f970fce9eca

Our copy

gov.uscourts.hid.154418.92.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)