In Dusenbery v. United States (2002) 534 U.S. 161, a federal administrative forfeiture case, the statute required the agency to send written notice of the seizure and information on the applicable forfeiture procedures to each party who appeared to have an interest in the property. (Dusenbery, supra, 534 U.S. at p. 164.) The government sent letters of its intention to forfeit the subject property by certified mail addressed to the petitioner in care of the federal prison where he was then incarcerated, to the address of the residence where petitioner was arrested, and to an address in the town where his mother lived. The property was declared administratively forfeited after the government received no response to its notices within the time allotted. (Ibid.) The petitioner argued that the notice was insufficient because due process generally required "actual notice" to interested parties prior to forfeiture, which he argued meant actual receipt of notice. (Id. at p. 169.) The high court held that the notice given the petitioner was " 'reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise petitioner of the pendency of the action.' " (Id. at p. 173.)