In United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property, U.S. 114 S.Ct. 492, 126 L.Ed.2d 490 (1993), the Court held that a failure to comply with statutory timing directives for expeditious prosecution in a civil forfeiture case under 21 U.S.C. Sec. 881 did not justify dismissal. U.S. at 114 S.Ct. at 505-07. The directives were a "series of internal notification and reporting requirements," see 19 U.S.C. Secs. 1602-04, under which "customs agents must report to customs officers, customs officers must report to the United States attorney, and the Attorney General must 'immediately' and 'forthwith' bring a forfeiture action if he believes that one is warranted." Id. at 114 S.Ct. at 498. The Court stated that "many statutory requisitions intended for the guide of officers in the conduct of business devolved upon them ... do not limit their power or render its exercise in disregard of the requisitions ineffectual." U.S. at 114 S.Ct. at 506 (quoting French v. Edwards, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 506, 511, 20 L.Ed. 702 (1872)).