!

BCR SCIENCE, PLLC

P.O. BOX 195301
DALLAS, TEXAS U.S. 75219
DrRostro@bcrscience.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

Pro Se

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

BCR SCIENCE PLLC ; Case No. :

Plaintiff ; CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FOR

EQUITABLE DAMAGES,
v. PUNITIVE DAMAGES, AND
REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE
OFFICE OF FOREIGN RELIEF
ASSETS CONTROL,
OFFICE OF
THE DIRECTOR, Judge: The Honorable
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
THE TREASURY; Date Action filed:
Defendants. Date set for trial:

Per SDN Designation

OFAC.Reconsideration@treasury.gov —-

The Office of Foreign Assets Control ( “ OFAC " ) of the

U.S. Department of the Treasury has labelled Denisse BuenRostro-
Villa ( DOB 22 March 1980 ) of Circuit Madrigal 4236—05, Zapopan
Guadalajara Jalisco Mexico 45510 in being linked to El Bano De
Maria S. De R.L. DE C.V.
In being a foreign individual, with its foreign entities,
per derivative designations, designated significant foreign
narcotics trafficking entities, named under the Kingpin Act for
the Caro Quintero Organization, with the date of the relevant
OFAC listing action predating June 12, 2013……documents
memorializing the completion of.
This OFAC Sanction identifies persons subject to, namely,
those engaged, either directly or indirectly, in undermining the
democratic process or otherwise threatening the sovereignty or
territorial integrity of U.S., and used to “ target the personal
assets and wealth, rather than the business entities and
industries that these may manage or oversee ".

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !2

OFAC maintains ( and publishes ) regulations and lists of

individuals and companies owned, or controlled by, or acting
for, or on behalf of, yet in this case, the OFAC BuenRostro-
Villa sanctions listing was done in error, with mens rea, to
target the Caro Quintero person, and family, that it [ OFAC ]
terms an Organization, therein, per defamation, slander, libel,
and clearly character assassination.
A recertification of the BuenRostro-Villa sanction is
sought from OFAC, and complaint herein made, due to the receipt
of critical information from JUSTICE — by Phil Jordan, former
director of the El Paso Intelligence Center ( EPIC ) ; Hector
Berrellez, former DEA agent, and Tosh Plumlee, a former CIA
pilot — who have pointed for years to the sinister Cuban-Israeli
characters of Operation 40-INTER-PEN, of IDF Mossad
Paramilitaries of which Rafael " Chi Chi " Quintero Ibaria,
Luis Posada Carrilles, Orlando Bosch Avila, Felix Ismael
Rodriguez, Manuel Bartlett Diaz, Barry Seal, Jim Nix Jackson,
James and Luther Haymon Gentry, Mark Miner, Robert and Gerald
Hemming, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro, Harvey Loomstein, Louis
Castellani, Susan Street, collectively Others, ( hereinafter
OTHERS ), formed part of, therein, engaged in criminal
activities of manslaughter, homicide, of Enrique Camarena with
staff of, with mens rea, inter alia, ergo, evidence in camera
( SIGINT ).
Testimonies, show OTHERS with Rafael “ Chi Chi " Quintero
Ibaria, per DEA, DIA, CIA testimonies, inter alia, with evidence
in camera that makes video documentation — from NARA, FBI, CIA —
as setting up and running assassinations, kidnappings, and the
arms-for-the-Contras branch of operations, at airstrips in the
Guadalajara ( Mexico ), El Salvador, Costa Rica, and the make
strip airport near the border of Jalisco and Guanajuato ( near
Ocampo Mexico ). These activities of OTHERS were paid for and
undertaken, under then Israeli intelligence agents — Meir Dagan,
Efraim Halevy, Yitzhak Shamir, Menachem Begin, Shimon Peres,
Ariel Sharon, Major General Menachem Meron ( Military Attache at
Israeli Embassy ), Yaakov Peri, Moshe Arens, Luis Clemente
Faustian Posada Carriles, Ari Ben Menashe, Rafi Eitan, Arnon
Milchan. Then Efraim Halevy a director of Mossad and 4th head
of the Israeli National Security Council formed part of various
counter-sabotage operations that included the Camarena incident.
In Houston Texas, under the protection of moles forming
part of Israeli-U.S. military advisers, the Israeli-U.S.
administration–contra–drug traffickers Rafael “ Chi Chi "
Quintero Ibaria and Felix Ismael Rodriguez, and Luis Clemente
Faustian Posada Carriles, Orlando Bosch Avila, and OTHERS were
directly involved in obtaining and transferring explosives

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !3

( C-4, OZ-12 ) used in the La Penca bombing for Mossad

operations and participation in the Enrique Camarena kidnapping,
torture, and execution.
The Caro Quintero Organization is erroneously blamed for
the death of Enrique Kiki Camarena, where Rafael Caro Quintero
is who, with mens rea, the U.S. Federal Government holds
accountable for the kidnapping, torture, death of ; and the
reason for this error is detailed below, per evidence in camera
( SIGINT ), Zevallos v. Obama, CV 13-0390 ( RC ), 2014 WL 197864
( D.D.C. Jan. 17, 2014 ) ( quoting 5 U.S.C. § 706 ( 2 )( A ) ).
The English to Spanish translation by Mr. Cesares Camara is
what showed that translations ( made with mens rea ) purposely
changed the name Rafael " Chi Chi " Quintero Ibaria to Rafael
Caro Quintero, evidence in camera ( SIGINT ).
The latter Caro was accused of delivering goods with OTHERS
— altered during the delivery — to reflect contraband explosives
and narcotics.
Since BCR Science relatives ( Rostro cousins and nephews )
were family friends and informants to Enrique Kiki Camarena
( Camarena ), and killed next to Camarena, it can be stated as a
matter of law, truth in law, that Rafael “ Chi Chi " Quintero
Ibaria and OTHERS, of the Mossad based CIA-Mossad cell of
Operation 40, and member of the Mossad-INTER-PEN, Mossad-INTER-
TEL with the Israeli intelligence agents ( named above ) were
the culprit of the Camarena kidnapping, torture, execution, per
evidence in camera ( SIGINT ).
This Camarena torture, and death in addition to the John F.
And Robert Kennedy targeted killings, the Iran-Nicaragua Contra
affairs of narcotics and munitions dealing operations — nuclear,
projectiles — were the works of Rafael “ Chi Chi " Quintero
Ibaria and the Israeli intelligence agents ( named above )
forming part of OTHERS.
Interview sheets, and recordings of Rafael “ Chi Chi "
Quintero Ibaria, and the OTHERS ( Israeli intelligence agents )
working with INTER-PEN Mossad-CIA, remain in my and in NARA
custodies. These records match KGB-SVR, MI6, InterPol evidence
of Operation 40-INTER-PEN, with then Mexican Mossad agent Manuel
Bartlett Diaz and other Israeli intelligence agents ( herein
OTHERS ) kidnapping, and questioning my cousins, nephews, with
Camarena in a ranch ( just outside Jalisco, near the border of
Guanajuato ) — this occurred while my entire Rostro family
observed from a mountain top ( all kidnapped persons being burnt
alive while Camarena was tied to a post, Camarena observing the
torture/burning/questioning of others, for 7 days ; Camarena was
executed the last 7th day, and his body transferred ( by truck )
to a new location with burnt cadavers — Rostro reports and films

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !4

from mountaintop SIGNALS post ), per evidence in camera ( SIGINT

).
The Rafael “ Chi Chi " Quintero Ibaria, then heading an
Israeli intelligence cell in Mexico ( of OTHERS) name becomes
confused with Rafael Caro Quintero, such actions purposely done
by Mr. Cesares Camara, to maintain legend and cover for Mossad-
CIA operations of ( Rafi Eitan, Arnon Milchan ), and other
Mossad-CIA moles under Efraim Halevy and Yaakov Perri with
OTHERS.
Mossad ( to date continues in such ) is known to grow
terpene plants in San Luis Potosi, and to transfer cuttings of
these plants to an area near the Ocampo, for synthesis of
missile fuels and nuclear warhead munitions — these transported
to neighboring Jalisco, for shipment to Negev Dimona, Israel,
per records shipments that remained active from 1962, per
evidence in camera ( SIGINT ).
I personally visited the said areas were Operation 40-
INTER-PEN worked with Mossad-CIA-OTHERS ( in Ocampo Guanajuato )
and even met locals then familiar with IDF Mossad operatives and
operations, inclusive of having discussed the filming of Arnon
Milchan’s Enrique Camarena movies, per evidence in camera
( SIGINT ).
Pictures, satellite footage, soil samples of Ocampo
revealed extensive visits from David Ben Gurion staff into the
area ( that predated 1962 ) due to a local Uranium mine ( my
father was born at the Uranium mining area near the Silver
mines, where the State of Israel stole my grandfather’s land and
illicitly developed the Negev Dimona against the wishes of John
F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy ; my Grandfather is who worked under
Joseph P. Kennedy since the 1940’s ; IDF Mossad dropped
salinated water with hydrofluoric acid to mine uranium with
other chemicals ; a vast majority of my family was killed by
Israel Mossad starting in 1955 due to this illicit mining in
said areas, per legion to the Kerr-McGee affairs ), per evidence
in camera ( SIGINT ).
The information relayed in this letter has been noted in
various authored documents, statements, interviews, and books
that voice critical information received from — Phil Jordan,
former director of the El Paso Intelligence Center ( EPIC ) ;
Hector Berrellez, former DEA agent ; and Tosh Plumlee, a former
CIA pilot — causing credibility to the sinister Cuban-Israeli
characters of Operation 40-INTER-PEN, the IDF Mossad
Paramilitaries-OTHERS that engaged in criminality with mens rea,
per evidence in camera ( SIGINT ).
While OFAC administers and enforces economic and trade
sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !5

goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes,

terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, and those
engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction, and other threats to the national security,
foreign policy or economy of the U.S., in the BuenRostro-Villa
case it does so in error, for which compensation is sought for (
1 Billion U.S. Dollar ( $1,000,000,000.00 U.S.D. ), inter
alia ).
The modus vivendi and modus operandi of the OFAC sanction
on BuenRostro-Villa, and the “ programmatic purpose ” of its
OFAC blocking actions and activities fail in preventing the
financing of future acts of, ( or other national emergencies )
alleged, with mens rea, due to sanction/s OFAC purposely
attributed in error.
The BuenRostro-Villa sanctions seeks evidence of guilt for
past crimes, albeit attributed in error, with actus reus of mens
rea, for OFAC stratagem therein.
OFAC has been previously faulted, ( prior to the
BuenRostro-Villa sanction case U.S. Courts faulted for similar
cases ), for having a long interim of over six months, and for
failing to cite precedent, by ex parte designation, and for
providing only a single issue ( in four years ), for viewing,
supra, per KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian Dev., Inc. v.
Geithner ( KindHearts I1 ), 647 F. Supp. 2d 857 ( N.D. Ohio 2009
). 

OFAC’s protection of release of data, is therein made to
cloud Agency’s illegal stratagem/s, therein, allegations null,
vid, “ arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion, or
otherwise not in accordance with the law ”, per Zevallos v.
Obama, CV 13-0390 ( RC ), 2014 WL 197864 ( D.D.C. Jan. 17,
2014 ) ( quoting 5 U.S.C. § 706 ( 2 )( A ) ).
OFAC states its special needs seizures “ must have built-in
limits, of confined geographic scope, regular, and suspicion
less application ” and are an incomplete reading of its
doctrines.
OFAC claims to list individuals, groups, and entities, such
as terrorists and narcotics traffickers designated under
programs not country specific, collectively called “ Specially
Designated Nationals " or “ SDNs ” blocked, and U.S. persons are
generally prohibited from dealing with these.
Special needs based OFAC cases are dragnet cases and
special subpopulation cases, where prior ( dragnet
limitations ), ignores categories of cases where standards of
individualized suspicion are less than probable cause or
justified by the factual circumstances.

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !6

The BuenRostro-Villa sanction action challenges, under the

APA, 5 U.S.C. § 706 ( 2 )( A ) ), and establishes a finding of
violation in the assessment of penalty issued on June 12, 2013,
by the OFAC.
In the BuenRostro-Villa case the seizure of property owned
by a nonresident alien in a foreign country is unjustified,
further, there is “ no significant voluntary connection ” with
the U.S., ( in violation of APA, and Fifth Amendment ) — due to
the substantive designation of the entity, per U.S. v. Verdugo-
Urquidez. No. 88-1353, argued Nov. 7, 1989, decided Feb. 28,
1990, 494 U.S. 259.
BCR Science revokes the allegations, listing/s ( and has
complained about this prior to this letter ), and remains
adamant in reiterating that the OFAC, to date, has not removed
its erroneous finding, with mens rea, since the OFAC now seeks
to penalize retroactively, based on documents executed.
OFAC’s finding of violation, imposition of penalties, are
unlawful under APA, this supra to OFAC’s post-hoc interpretation
of, where designation arbitrary, capricious, per abuse of
discretion, otherwise not in accordance with the law/s.
OFAC violated Fifth Amendment rights to due process, in
this case, since “ OFAC failed to provide notice of the specific
transactions that would be deemed unlawful until after the
allegedly unlawful conduct occurred ”.
Indeed, as explained above, “ authoritative guidance from……
the Treasury Department ma[ kes ] clear that the conduct was
lawful and proper, where OFAC violates due process for a party
if held liable, retroactively, for such conduct ”.
OFAC sanction/s on the BuenRostro-Villa case relies on “
new interpretation/s by OFAC ” that had not been announced at
the time of the challenged conduct, and contravenes plain text
of, therein directly contrary to contemporaneous, authoritative
guidance ” from National Archives and Records Administration
( NARA ), that repeatedly make clear that actions in violation
of allegations ; therein sanctions are challenged based on
OFAC’s alleged finding of conduct — that is clearly false —
therein sanction/s null, per Al Haramain Islamic Found., Inc. v.
U.S. Dep't of Treasury, 686 F.3d 965, 983 ( 9th Cir. 2011 ) ;
further due process rights of the blocked entity violated.
Independently, on the basis that the finding of, and
imposition of penalties/y, are then without fair notice,
likewise deprives of due process, making for violations of.
Yet, OFAC has continuously failed to mitigate its inability
to view the [ classified ] information underpinning the
designation per “ void disclosure of classified information ”.
Therein, the designated BuenRostro-Villa cannot possibly know

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !7

how to respond to OFAC's concerns, and without knowledge of,

simple factual errors have gone, and continue to go,
uncorrected, despite potentially easy, ready, and persuasive
explanations from NARA and JUSTICE, inter alia.
For dispositive consideration, “ the warrant or ex ante
review is not required ” in this BuenRostro-Villa case — herein
null, per assets not initially pursuant to an emergency
exception ; and no connections to the U.S.
OFAC actions on BuenRostro-Villa therein unlawful and
contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, and
immunity.
The quality of the evidence supporting the BuenRostro-Villa
designation also lacks reasonableness, therein OFAC violated the
Fourth Amendment, and moreover, the quality of the designation
evidence is in violation, and this compounds this particular
case.
Pursuant to OFAC guidance ( or through its anomalous
guidance established ) if a designated person owns, directly or
indirectly, a 50 percent or greater interest in an entity, that
50 percent-owned entity also is considered blocked by OFAC, even
if, such same entity, has not been specifically designated by
OFAC. U.S. persons are therefore prohibited from doing business
with any entity in which a designated person owns a 50 percent
or greater interest, regardless of whether such entity is listed
on the SDN List. Yet for the BuenRostro-Villa case OFAC has
been capricious, per abuse of discretion, otherwise not in
accordance with the law/s due to purposely made OFAC errors,
with mens rea, and targeted per Caro Quintero Organization such
person, it [ OFAC ] terms an Organization, therein per
defamation, slander, libel, and clearly character assassination.
Therein, in the BuenRostro-Villa case, OFAC establishes
erroneous deprivation since formal finding that the entity has
violated sanctions is precluded.
OFAC has likewise violated procedural due process in other
cases ( per Court/s ) — for months to years of interim, supra —
for providing largely uninformative, unclassified case file
record/s of the basis of the designation, despite sanctions not
supported by substantial evidence.
OFAC also found to have violated Fourth Amendment
jurisprudence right/s ( in being free from unreasonable seizure/
s ) by failing warrant requirement prior to issuing its blocking
order and freezing of assets, claiming “ special needs exception
” therein central to Fourth Amendment constitutionality of OFAC
blocking orders, per KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian
Dev., Inc. v. Geithner, 647 F. Supp. 2d 857, 906-08 ( N.D. Ohio
2009 ).

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !8

The BuenRostro Villa sanction further causes immediate

jeopardy due to the consequent imposition of the above noted
sanctions, albeit erroneously done with mens rea, where listing
based mainly on allegations, per Case T-293/12, Syria
International Islamic Bank PJSC v. Council ( June 11, 2014 ).
Therein OFAC’s use of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence
constitutes “ search ” yet OFAC claims its blocking orders make
it only possible for “ seizure ” and not incident to search per
territorial terms, per U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez. No. 88-1353.
Argued Nov. 7, 1989, decided Feb. 28, 1990, 494 U.S. 259.
Notwithstanding, the economic blocking/s against foreign
governments and persons, not subject to Fourth Amendment
protections, does not shield OFAC blocking orders from judicial
warrant, per supported by probable cause, and Fourth Amendment
content and meaning by reference to the warrant clause, in Al
Haramain II, No. 07-1155-KI, 2009 WL 3756363, at *11 ( D. Or.
Nov. 5, 2009 ), aff1’d in part, rev’d in part, 686 F.3d 965
( 9th Cir. 2011 ).
Yet, the BuenRostro-Villa case does not apply to the search
and seizure of property, per owned by a nonresident alien in a
foreign country. Further no “ significant voluntary connection
” with the U.S. exists, per warrantless seizures of property
unreasonable, per Katz v. U.S., 389 U.S. 347, 357 ( 1967 ) ;
U.S. v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 701 ( 1983 ) ; Virginia v. Moore,
553 U.S. 164, 171 ( 2008 ).
Court/s have concluded, inter alia, edict and dictum
favoring that the “ freezing of assets is beyond normal law
enforcement…therein the purpose of the asset seizure scheme is
not to obtain information about whether……asset owner has
committed an act of……, yet rather is to withhold assets, and to
ensure future……acts are not committed ”, per Griffin v.
Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868, 873 ( 1987 ).
OFAC blocking order/s often do occur by precluding warrant/
s, making the escape of Fourth Amendment scrutiny, or subject to
an exception. This lack of scrutiny precludes probable cause
existing or for warrant to be properly executed for the
BuenRostro-Villa case.
Yet, when OFAC blocking orders violate Fourth Amendment, it
must be established if ( 1 ) aggrieved party enjoys Fourth
Amendment protection, ( 2 ) government action/s are “ seizure ”
and ( 3 ) if so, whether these are “ unreasonable ” seizure, per
“ special needs ” exception.
In connection with the BuenRostro-Villa case, OFAC
continues to maintain its maladaptive administration of its
sanctions program, by “ novel and counterintuitive
interpretation/s ” on which it now seeks to penalize.

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !9

Therein the listing of all deficiencies identified ( in the

BuenRostro-Villa case sanction listing ) pertain to the Caro
Quintero Organization that OFAC issued, for blocking, per
suspected to have violated laws.
The seriousness of the deficiencies cited under this OFAC
BuenRostro-Villa case listing have resulted in the finding of
immediate jeopardy to the health and safety of the named.
Therein this request of reconsideration reiterates that
this OFAC BuenRostro-Villa case submission does not constitute a
credible allegation, forcing OFAC out of compliance, ergo,
materializes deliberate actions aberrant, per OFAC’s seizure of
assets as a result of its designation order of a non-U.S. entity
located outside the U.S., where BuenRostro-Villa lacks
sufficient connections to raise such claims, supra, per Judgment
in Joined Cases C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P, European
Commission and Others v. Yassin Abdullah Kadi (July 18, 2013,
Kadi v. Geithner, --- F. Supp. 2d ----, 2012 WL 898778, at *19 (
D.D.C. Mar. 19, 2012 ).
This complaint with the receipt of critical information
received from JUSTICE ( credibility enforced ) voices lack of
compliance ( due to aberrant use of data in this sanction/s
listing/s ) from OFAC, done with mens rea, since it made/makes
deviant applications of OFAC law/s, per Judgment in Joined Cases
C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P, European Commission and
Others v. Yassin Abdullah Kadi (July 18, 2013, Kadi v. Geithner,
--- F. Supp. 2d ----, 2012 WL 898778, at *19 ( D.D.C. Mar. 19,
2012 ).
The BuenRostro-Villa case listing, and the grounds under
which specified, be this “ individual, specific and concrete ”,
must not be “ biased allegations ”, per Judgment in Joined Cases
C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P, European Commission and
Others v. Yassin Abdullah Kadi (July 18, 2013, Kadi v. Geithner,
--- F. Supp. 2d ----, 2012 WL 898778, at *19 ( D.D.C. Mar. 19,
2012 ).
OFAC blocking orders that require coordination with other
governments, are “ not well-founded ”, moreover, insufficient to
justify categorical application of the special needs exception,
therein not subject to U.S. jurisdiction, per Judgment in Joined
Cases C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P, European Commission
and Others v. Yassin Abdullah Kadi (July 18, 2013, Kadi v.
Geithner, --- F. Supp. 2d ----, 2012 WL 898778, at *19 ( D.D.C.
Mar. 19, 2012 ).
Inasmuch, OFAC “ must have built-in limits, i.e. confined
geographic scope or regular, suspicion based application ”, per
quintessential dragnet limitations “ that restrict executive

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !10

discretion and ensure that all citizens know the circumstances

under which they are subject to a special needs search or
seizure ”, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S.
142, 158-59 (2012).
This OFAC BuenRostro-Villa case listing is not deemed a “
harmless error on remand ” since there is insufficient evidence
to support the designation and SIGNALS INTELLIGENCE ( SIGINT )
has existed ( since 1986 ) to clarify and correct the OFAC
errors made with mens rea, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham
Corp., 567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
Acceptable evidence of correction for the OFAC deficiencies
cited ( with complaints made ) further fail to demonstrate that
the OFAC has come into condition-level compliance, nor abated
the immediate jeopardy posed by its deviant applications of law,
per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142,
158-59 (2012).
Prevailing persons sanctioned and litigants for sanctioned,
entitled to attorneys’ fees, even if these fees ( 2 Billion
U.S.D. ) exceed the damages sought ( 1 Billion U.S.D. ), therein
places a modicum of informal precedent for this action, supra,
per Al Haramain Islamic Found, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Treasury
( Al Haramain II1 ), No. 07- 1155-KI, 2009 WL 3756363, at *10
( D. Or. Nov. 5, 2009 ), aff1’d in part, rev’d in part, 686 F.3d
965 ( 9th Cir. 2011 ) ; Al Haramain, 686 F.3d 965; Kadi v.
Geithner, 42 F. Supp. 3d 1 ( D.D.C. 2012 ); Al Haramain II, 2009
WL 3756363 ; KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian Dev., Inc.
v. Geithner ( KindHearts I1 ), 647 F. Supp. 2d 857 ( N.D. Ohio
2009 ) ; Al-Aqeel v. Paulson, 568 F. Supp. 2d 64 ( D.D.C. 2008 )
; Islamic Am. Relief Agency v. Unidentif.ied FBI Agents, 394 F.
Supp. 2d 34 ( D.D.C. 2005 ), aff1’d in part sub nom. Islamic Am.
Relief Agency v. Gonzales, 477 F.3d 728 ( D.C. Cir. 2007 ) ;
Holy Land Found. for Relief & Dev. v. Ashcroft, 219 F. Supp. 2d
57 ( D.D.C. 2002 ), aff1’d, 333 F.3d 156 ( D.C. Cir. 2003 ).
OFAC has already candidly acknowledged that “ it has not
yet come to its own view, as to legal standard/s that it thought
should apply ” to cases like the BuenRostro-Villa, and has “ no
ability to identify, with the necessary ascertainable certainty
any standards to which OFAC is expected to conform ( which, as
noted above, cannot be squared with the text of……crucial
distinction between the method and the “ programmatic purpose ”
of the activit[ ies ] ”, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham
Corp., 567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
Inasmuch, the purpose of OFAC blocking actions is to
prevent the financing of future acts, ( or other national
emergencies ) as opposed to seeking evidence of guilt for past
crimes, in this case crimes attributed to OTHERS, per

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !11

Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142, 158-59

(2012).
OFAC enforcement actions are usually civil, not criminal,
therein actions made to set penalty/ies aside, per unlawful, and
for “ forcing declaratory and injunctive relief against the
Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury ( “
Secretary of the Treasury ” ) in official capacity, and the
Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control ( “ Director of
OFAC ” ) in official capacity, and OFAC ( together, the “
Defendants ” ), with sovereign immunity waived by 5 U.S.C. §
702.
The determination related to this OFAC BuenRostro-Villa
case listing and provided review of the submission with proposed
sanctions against the Caro Quintero Organization/Family place
the OFAC based findings in immediate jeopardy, due to inherent
errors in the case, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.,
567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
The BuenRostro-Villa case precludes any “ Fourth Amendment
interests ” given that “ BuenRostro-Villa is a Mexican citizen
with substantial assets overseas ”, per Kadi, 42 F. Supp. 3d at
37 n.21 ( quoting U.S. v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 125
( 1984 ) ).
In OFAC’s failure to meet all records requirements, and the
failure to comply with accurate data, and performance standards,
then evidenced by the deficiencies cited, makes OFAC sanctions
listing fall under the misfeasance, nonfeasance, and
malfeasance, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567
U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
Therein, OFAC seeks to retroactively enforce “ a new
interpretation ” of its sanctions on the BuenRostro-Villa case
and uses “ inconsistent, explicit, unambiguous guidance from its
fundamentally unfair policies, and this constitutes a denial of
due process under the Constitution, and violates the APA, due to
the notice of the arbitrary and capricious interpretations that
the OFAC now seeks to retroactively enforce “, per Christopher
v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
“ OFAC’s new interpretation is therein not entitled to
deference and should/can/MUST be rejected ” for the BuenRostro-
Villa case, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567
U.S. 142, 155-59 (2012), where the agency’s current
interpretation of the attendant sanctions designation are
plainly erroneous and inconsistent with both the order itself,
and the nature of the sanctions.
Further OFAC’s BuenRostro-Villa case penalty notice makes
new and retroactive sanctions decisions that exceed their
unambiguous scope, per Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.,

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |
 !12

567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012). 


By matter of law, and fact in law, inter alia, the matter
of fairness is made, per Motion to Quash based on Compulsory
Process ( forensics evidence and critical JUSTICE information
being Exculpatory Evidence and for the Medical Unit Science
Technology Directorate Intelligence of Exterior ( MUST-DI-E )
based SIGINT in place ), per Exclusionary Rule, Christopher v.
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
OFAC drew its arbitrary and capricious distinctions for
this BuenRostro-Villa case, therein, OFAC guidance cannot/must
not be controlling, and should not/cannot be relied upon, nor
enforced, per Penalty Notice Based on a Misapplication of
Regulations for Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567
U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
Further, OFAC makes broader than, and is plainly
inconsistent with authoritative guidance issued for this
BuenRostro-Villa case. Therein OFAC’s penalty calculation and
finding of “ egregiousness ” also reflects a plainly incorrect
misapplication of its own regulations, per Christopher v.
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142, 158-59 (2012).
WHEREFORE, BCR respectfully request that OFAC comply with —
(a) Holding unlawful and setting aside OFAC’s finding of
violations that are unlawful and contrary to constitutional
right, power, privilege, and immunity ; (b) Holding unlawful and
setting aside the imposed penalty of 2 Billion U.S.D.
( $2,000,000,000.00 U.S.D. ), inter alia, amounts to 3 Billion
U.S.D. ( $3,000,000,000.00 U.S.D. ), and “ for the OFAC offender
to find ignorance ( playing dumb ) being too costly, such that
if ignorance is sufficiently costly, OFAC will become ( or
remain ) informed, notwithstanding, the enhanced risk of
penalties associated with losing one’s ignorance, per actus reus
of mens rea “ ; (c) Declaring that alleged conduct did not and
could not violate U.S. policies, per mis-identification/s ; (d)
Permanently enjoining OFAC from collecting civil penalties in
connection with the Penalty Notice ; and (e) Granting such other
monetary relief, deemed proper.
This letter nulls the legality of the proposed OFAC
sanctions on the BuenRostro-Villa case, and gave information and
evidence, as to why the sanctions should not, and legally
cannot, be imposed, to such case or other Caro Quintero linked
cases.

Dr. Rostro

| BCR Science, PLLC | PO Box 195301 | Dallas, Texas USA 75219 | DrRostro@bcrscience.com |