Kobre & Kim was engaged by a Cayman investment fund (the "Client") to resist asset freezes sought by the U.S. government. The U.S. had requested a restraining order to temporarily freeze assets of the Client and the co-defendant based upon a request made by the Government of Brazil under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) between the two nations. The fund was alleged to contain more than nearly half a billion USD on deposit in financial institutions in New York.

The case team successfully challenged the request on the ground that any assets held in the United States could not be frozen at the request of a foreign government unless and until a foreign court had entered a “final” order of forfeiture. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with the Client, ultimately rejecting the U.S. Government’s applications for restraints. The Department of Justice (DOJ) immediately appealed.

Answering this novel question of law in a precedent-setting decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court’s opinion in July 2010, upholding the challenge to the restraints and finding that U.S. law did not in fact bestow upon the U.S. Courts the power to freeze assets at the request of foreign governments prior to the execution of a final order of forfeiture by a court in the foreign country.

Kobre & Kim presented an innovative argument in this case, challenging the request for a temporary asset freeze on the ground that any assets held in the United States could not be frozen at the request of a foreign government unless and until a foreign court had entered a “final” order of forfeiture. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit affirmed the District Court’s opinion, leading to the DOJ to work with Congress to amend the existing statute.