alleged search and seizure. In any event, Auster’s factual allegations established its right to undertake to produce evidence at trial demonstrating unreasonableness. Assessment of the reasonableness of conduct involves balancing “the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual’s Fourth Amendment interests against the importance of the governmental interests alleged to justify the intrusion.” United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 703, 103 S.Ct. 2637, 2642, 77 L.Ed.2d 110 (1983); Jacobsen, — U.S. at -, 104 S.Ct. at 1662-63 (quoting Place). In this case, Auster alleged that the microchip operation entailed extensive tampering with production facilities. We may reasonably infer that the operation lasted a significant period of time, see Place, 462 U.S. at 707, 103 S.Ct. at 2645 (<HOLDING>), that damage to production facilities
holding three to four hour detention of luggage unreasonable holding that an initially reasonable seizure can become an unreasonable seizure that violates the fourth amendment when officers refuse to return seized property holding that allegations that a seized vehicle was improperly retained and damaged state claims of a denial of due process and right to be free from unreasonable seizure holding seizure unreasonable due to length of detention of property holding warrant check not unreasonable where detention not extended solely for that purpose