Dist. Ct. erred in instant civil forfeiture proceeding in striking claimant’s claim to $196,969 that had been seized from defendant’s home under circumstances where govt. had suspected that claimant was drug dealer, where Dist. Ct.’s order was based on claimant’s failure to fully comply with requirements set forth under 18 USC section 983(a)(3) and Supplemental Rule G(2) regarding how he had obtained possession of said cash. Claimant’s claim was verified, and govt. could not demand at initial stage of proceeding that claimant prove, beyond allegations made in claim itself, that he had standing to assert instant claim. On remand, Dist. Ct. is free to find that instant claim is frivolous if claimant persists in his contention that his mere occupancy of his home signifies rights of ownership of everything in his residence.