MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDERI. INTRODUCTIONNow before the Court is Mr. Robert Levy’s (“Petitioner”) Rule 60(b) motion to vacate the Court’s Final Order of Forfeiture previously entered against $167,600 in U.S. Currency. (Dkt. No. 47). Petitioner argues that the Court’s judgment of forfeiture, (Dkt. No. 45), is void and that the Government’s failure to notify Petitioner of the civil forfeiture action justifies the return of $167,600 in seized currency to Petitioner along with an award of attorneys’ fees. (Dkt. No. 47). The Government joins in Petitioner’s motion to vacate the judgment but opposes further relief. (Dkt. No. 51). For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Petitioner’s motion to vacate the Final Order of Forfeiture as against the $167,600. At this time, the Court denies Petitioner’s request for the prompt “equitable” return of the $167,600 and reserves judgment on Petitioner’s request for attorneys’ fees.II. BACKGROUNDOn April 13, 2013, the Government executed a search warrant for Petitioner’s residence in Pompano Beach, Florida. (Dkt. Nos. 47-2, 2; 51, p. 1). Petitioner was present and cooperative during the search and assisted law enforcement in locating the $167,600 that was ultimately seized from his home. (Dkt. No. 51-1, pp. 2-3).The United States commenced this civil forfeiture action by filing a complaint for forfeiture in rem on July 2, 2013. (Dkt. No. 1). The complaint named the $167,600 that was seized from Petitioner’s home as one of fifteen defendant financial instruments involved in the case. (Id.). The complaint alleged that each piece of seized property was subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §981(a)(1)(A) as property involved in a money laundering offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§1955, 1956(h), 1956(a)(1)(B)(i), 1957 and 1962. (Id.).On October 3, 2013, the Court issued a civil judgment in favor of the Government against all defendant properties. (Dkt. Nos. 27, 28). The Court’s judgment of forfeiture was thereafter subject to two amended judgments on May 13, 2015 and September 15, 2015. (Dkt. Nos. 42, 45). The subject $167,600 remained forfeited to the United States. (Dkt. No. 45).Petitioner did not receive notice of the Government’s civil forfeiture action when it was initiated and did not become aware of the forfeiture action and default judgment until March 2018. (Dkt. No. 47-2,
