1. Whether the district court had ancillary jurisdiction over
property seized during the criminal investigation of an
offense prosecuted in said district court?

2. Whether the United States was in possession of properties,
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16, when the properties were
seized during the criminal investigation of an offense
prosecuted in federal court, included in the United States
discovery to Augustin, vouched for during closing argument at trial, presented in the United States case-in-chief , and obtained
from and belonged to Augustin?

3. Whether a claim for money damages can be asserted when the United
States is held responsible for lost or illegally forfeited
property in the United States constructive possession?

or

Whether the Fed.;'R. Crim. P. 41 Motion for Return of Property
should have been construed as a Bivens action once the United
States admitted it no longer possessed the property that was in its constructive possession?

Whether the district court had ancillary jurisdiction over property seized during the criminal investigation