According to legal blog “How Appealing” a convicted but unsuccessful semen smuggler will not be getting the (now seized) sperm back. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held, in all its awesome appellate majesty and with just a hint of risque humor:

The District Court found that the criminal conduct to which Mrs. Parlavecchio pleaded guilty was conspiracy to bribe a public official, that is, “the illegal payment of money in exchange for receiving seminal fluids from Mrs. Parlavecchio’s husband.” In essence, Mrs. Parlavecchio was seeking a return of the very fruits of her criminal activity. The District Court held, therefore, that a return of the seminal fluid would violate the basic principle that a claimant in a civil equitable proceeding must come into court with “clean hands.”