tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44752064989085734512024-03-13T09:17:13.657-04:00The Manhattan BarristerRecent Precedential Slip Opinions from the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2687125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-59687346491581115892015-05-12T15:31:00.002-04:002015-05-12T15:31:21.459-04:00Lull in ServiceAs avid readers will note, we haven't posted anything in a couple of weeks. This likely means that the editors are out there somewhere reading long books under old trees. We will return to regular posting at some future time. Cheers.<br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-41241506953002062372015-04-10T14:43:00.002-04:002015-04-10T14:43:34.186-04:00Very Short Form -- Recent DecisionsFirst Circuit:<br />
<table align="center" bgcolor="#CACAAA" border="1" style="font-family: Georgia; width: 98%px;"><tbody>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1048P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1048P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1048</a></td><td> US v. Foley<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1048P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1048P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1118</a></td><td> US v. Foley<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-2136P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2136P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2136</a></td><td> US v. Melendez-Rivera<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-2176P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2176P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2176</a></td><td> US v. Razo<br /> <span>District Court of Maine, Bangor</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-2384P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2384P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2384</a></td><td> Montanez Allman v. Garcia-Padilla<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1001P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1001P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1001</a></td><td> Law Offices of David Efron v. Matthews & Fullmer Law Firm<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1370P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1370P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1370</a></td><td> Matusevich v. Middlesex Mutual Assurance Com<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1543P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1543P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1543</a></td><td> US v. Szpyt<br /> <span>District Court of Maine, Portland</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1550P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1550P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1550</a></td><td> Dimova v. Holder, Jr.<br /> <span>Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1550P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1550P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2013</a></td><td> Dimova v. Holder<br /> <span>Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-2205P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2205P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2205</a></td><td> US v. Romero-Galindez<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1018E-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1018E.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1018</a></td><td> AFDI v. MBTA<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1018E-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1018E.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1289</a></td><td> AFDI v. MBTA<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1050P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1050P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1050</a></td><td> Aponte-Ramos v. Alvarez-Rubio<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1050P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1050P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1052</a></td><td> Diaz-Vazquez v. Alvarez-Rubio<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1450E-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1450E.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1450</a></td><td> Dutkewych v. Standard Insurance Company<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1466P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1466P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1466</a></td><td> Perry v. Roy<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1050P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1050P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1050</a></td><td> US v. Del-Valle-Cruz<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1297P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1297P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1297</a></td><td> Torres-Rivera v. Lozada-Crespo<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1912P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1912P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1912</a></td><td> Santangelo v. New York Life Insurance Co.<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/07</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-2397U-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2397U.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-2397</a></td><td> US v. Cruz-Fernandez<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/07</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1001E-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1001E.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1001</a></td><td> Law Offices of David Efron v. Matthews & Fullmer Law Firm<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/07</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1015U-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1015U.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1015</a></td><td> US v. Sweeney<br /> <span>District Court of Maine, Bangor</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/07</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1580P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1580P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1580</a></td><td> Cronin v. Commissioner of Probation<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/09</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1286E-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1286E.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1286</a></td><td> US v. Carpenter<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/09</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1298U-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1298U.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1298</a></td><td> Montanez v. Mitchell<br /> <span>District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/09</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1368P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1368P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1368</a></td><td> US v. Oquendo-Garcia<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/09</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1701U-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1701U.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">14-1701</a></td><td> Clark v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.<br /> <span>District Court of Maine, Bangor</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center">2015/04/10</td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1674P-01A.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1674P.01A</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html" style="color: purple; text-decoration: none;">13-1674</a></td><td> US v. Torres-Landrua<br /> <span>District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
Second Circuit:<br />
<br />
<table border="1" bordercolor="#000000" style="font-family: arial; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="116"><b><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/1/doc/13-1484_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/1/hilite/"><nobr><b style="color: black;">13</b>-1484-ag</nobr><nobr></nobr></a></b></td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="500">Lugo v. Holder</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="172">04-09-2015</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="100">OPN</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table border="1" bordercolor="#000000" style="font-family: arial; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="116"><b><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/2/doc/13-3903_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/2/hilite/"><nobr><b style="color: black;">13</b>-3903-cv </nobr><nobr></nobr></a></b></td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="500">Continental Terminals, Inc. v. Waterfront Comm'n of N.Y. Harbor </td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="172">04-03-2015</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="100">OPN</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table border="1" bordercolor="#000000" style="font-family: arial; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="116"><b><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/3/doc/14-1786_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/3/hilite/"><nobr><b style="color: black;">14</b>-1786 (L)</nobr><nobr></nobr></a></b></td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="500">Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. FERC</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="172">04-02-2015</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="100">OPN</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table border="1" bordercolor="#000000" style="font-family: arial; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="116"><b><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/4/doc/14-1468_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/4/hilite/"><nobr><b style="color: black;">14</b>-1468-cv</nobr><nobr></nobr></a></b></td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="500">Smith et al., v. Campbell</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="172">04-01-2015</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="100">OPN</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table border="1" bordercolor="#000000" style="font-family: arial; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="116"><b><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/5/doc/13-3610_complete_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/41b56a01-881d-41cd-9268-9b415d83f4dc/5/hilite/"><nobr><b style="color: black;">13</b>-3610</nobr><nobr></nobr></a></b></td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="500">Ortiz-Franco v. Holder</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="172">04-01-2015</td><td style="font-family: Arial;" width="100">OPN</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Third Circuit:<br />
<br />
Filed 04/10/15, No. 11-3996<br /><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/113996p.pdf" target="_blank">Michael Siluk, Jr. v. Catherine Merwin</a><br />USDC for the Middle District of Pennsylvania<br /><br />Filed 04/09/15, No. 14-1402<br /><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/141402p.pdf" target="_blank">Jose Chavez-Alvarez v. Warden York County Prison</a><br />USDC for the Middle District of Pennsylvania<br /><br />Filed 04/08/15, No. 12-4067<br /><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/124067p.pdf" target="_blank">In re: Blood Reagents Antitrus v.</a><br />USDC for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania<br /><br />Filed 04/07/15, No. 14-1816<br /><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/141816p.pdf" target="_blank">Dale Kaymark v. Bank of America NA</a><br />USDC for the Western District of Pennsylvania<br /><br />Filed 04/07/15, No. 13-4434<br /><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/134434p.pdf" target="_blank">Shalom Pentecostal Church v. Secretary United States Depart</a><br />USDC for the District of New Jersey<br />
<br />
<br />
Fourth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a 131031.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/131031.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>131031.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Joseph Antonio v. SSA Security, Inc. (Floyd 4/3/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Affirmed </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Civil Private (DMD Williams) </span><br />
<hr style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<a 134895.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134895.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>134895.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">US v. Abukar Beyle (Wilkinson 4/3/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Affirmed </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Criminal (EDVA Smith) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><hr style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<a 122034.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/122034.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>122034.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">West Virginia CWP Fund v. Page Bender, Jr. (Keenan 4/2/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Petition for review denied </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Agency Review (BRB) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><hr style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<a 122273.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/122273.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>122273.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Clifton Valentine v. Sugar Rock, Inc. (King 4/2/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Civil Private (NDWV Keeley) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><hr style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<a 134412.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134412.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>134412.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">US v. Steven Helton (Wilkinson 4/2/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Affirmed </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Criminal (SDWV Berger) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><hr style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<a 137445.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/137445.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>137445.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">US v. Abel Rangel (Agee 4/1/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Affirmed </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">28 USC Section 2255 (EDVA Hilton) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><hr style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<a 141122.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/141122.P.pdf" style="color: #003399; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion"><b>141122.P </b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Charles vonRosenberg v. Mark Lawrence (Motz 3/31/2015) </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Published opinion after argument: Vacated and remanded </span><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Civil Private (DSC Houck) </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Fifth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<table class="rgMasterTable" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00" style="background-color: white; border-spacing: 0px; color: #333333; empty-cells: show; font-family: 'Segoe UI', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px; table-layout: auto; width: 920px;"><tbody>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__0" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/10/10-70016-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="10-70016">10-70016</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/06/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">John Matamoros v. William Stephens, Director</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__1" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-11358-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="13-11358">13-11358</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/02/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Jerrell Squyres v. Heico Companies, L.L.C., et al</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__2" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-30918-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="13-30918">13-30918</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/08/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Nola Spice Designs, L.L.C., et al v. Haydel Enterp</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__3" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-31214-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="13-31214">13-31214</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/07/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Gulf Restoration Network, et al v. Gina McCarthy,</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__4" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-50075-CV1.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="13-50075">13-50075</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/09/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Barron & Newburger, P.C. v. Texas Skyline, Limited</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__5" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-50745-CR0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="13-50745">13-50745</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/06/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">USA v. Marco Alvarado-Zarza</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__6" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-70001-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="13-70001">13-70001</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">03/31/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">William Speer v. William Stephens, Director</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__7" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-10049-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-10049">14-10049</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/07/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Christopher Crane, et al v. Jeh Johnson, et al</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__8" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-10287-CR0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-10287">14-10287</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/03/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">USA v. Fermin Rodriguez-Bernal</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__9" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-10631-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-10631">14-10631</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/02/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Campbell Harrison & Dagley, et al v. Albert Hill,</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__10" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-20433-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-20433">14-20433</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/07/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">PoolRe Insurance Corporation, et al v. Organizatio</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__11" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30357-CR0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-30357">14-30357</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">03/31/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">USA v. Sealed Juvenile</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__12" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-40059-CR0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-40059">14-40059</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">03/31/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">USA v. Elmer Gomez-Alvarez</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__13" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-40168-CR0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-40168">14-40168</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/09/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">USA v. Jose Mendoza</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__14" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-40455-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-40455">14-40455</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/09/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Robert Ortega v. William Stephens, Director</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__15" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-60366-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-60366">14-60366</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/06/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Gayle McMullin v. MS Dept of Public Safety, et al</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgRow gridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__16" style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-70025-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="14-70025">14-70025</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/06/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Daniel Lopez v. William Stephens, Director</td><td style="border-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
<tr class="rgAltRow altGridRow" id="ctl00_Body_C010_ctl00_ctl00_radGridOpinions_ctl00__17" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1px; cursor: default;"><td class="rgGroupCol" style="background-color: #d9d9d9; background-image: none; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-color: rgb(217, 217, 217); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 0px 3px; text-align: center;"> </td><td class="hyperlink" style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 166px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-70004-CV0.pdf" style="color: black; outline: none; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="15-70004">15-70004</a></td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 78px;">04/01/2015</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 437px;">Garcia White, et al v. Brad Livingston, et al</td><td style="border-color: rgb(242, 242, 242); border-style: solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 4px 7px 3px; width: 167px;">pub</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Sixth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<table align="center" bgcolor="lightblue" border="1" style="width: 98%px;"><tbody>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0057p-06.pdf">15a0057p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-6349</a></td><td align="center">2015/03/31</td><td> USA v. Patrick Winters<br /> <span>Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0058p-06.pdf">15a0058p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-1091</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/01</td><td> Maple Drive Farms v. Tom Vilsack<br /> <span>Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0059p-06.pdf">15a0059p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-6649</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/03</td><td> USA v. Donald Melton<br /> <span>Eastern District of Kentucky at Ashland</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0060p-06.pdf">15a0060p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-4105</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td> Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp. v. Karaoke Kandy Store, Inc.<br /> <span>Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0061p-06.pdf">15a0061p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">14-3117</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td> Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp. v. Karaoke Kandy Store, Inc.<br /> <span>Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0062p-06.pdf">15a0062p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-4057</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td> USA v. United Technologies<br /> <span>Southern District of Ohio at Dayton</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0063p-06.pdf">15a0063p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">14-1680</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/06</td><td> Planet Aid v. City of St. Johns, MI<br /> <span>Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0064p-06.pdf">15a0064p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">14-1687</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/07</td><td> Angel Garcia v. FNMA<br /> <span>Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0065p-06.pdf">15a0065p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-4468</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/08</td><td> Henricks v. Pickaway Corr. Inst.<br /> <span>Southern District of Ohio at Columbus</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0066p-06.pdf">15a0066p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">12-2484</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/10</td><td> EEOC v. Ford Motor Company<br /> <span>Eastern District of Michigan at Ann Arbor</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0067p-06.pdf">15a0067p.06</a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html">13-4188</a></td><td align="center">2015/04/10</td><td> USA v. Joshua Stafford<br /> <span>Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Seventh Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<table cellspacing="3"><tbody>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-3521</td><td>Gennadiy Volodarskiy v.<br /> Delta Air Lines, Inc.</td><td>civil</td><td>04/10/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-10/C:13-3521:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:1532328:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Sykes</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2301</td><td>Aircraft Check Services Compan v.<br /> Verizon Wireless</td><td>civil</td><td>04/09/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-09/C:14-2301:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1531426:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Posner</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2599</td><td>Brenda Mitze v.<br /> Carolyn Colvin</td><td>civil</td><td>04/09/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-09/C:14-2599:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1531728:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Posner</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-3012</td><td>Matthew Stanek v.<br /> Saint Charles Community Unit</td><td>civil</td><td>04/09/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-09/C:14-3012:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1531942:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Wood</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1223</td><td>USA v.<br /> Parrish Kappes</td><td>criminal</td><td>04/08/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-08/C:14-1223:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1530888:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2135</td><td>USA v.<br /> David L. Crisp, Jr.</td><td>criminal</td><td>04/08/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-08/C:14-2135:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1530889:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2482</td><td>USA v.<br /> Jeffrey Jurgens</td><td>criminal</td><td>04/08/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-08/C:14-2482:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1530890:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1435</td><td>USA v.<br /> Mark Bozovich</td><td>criminal</td><td>04/07/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-07/C:14-1435:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:1530142:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Hamilton</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1889</td><td>Mohamed Mathin v.<br /> John F. Kerry</td><td>civil</td><td>04/07/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-07/C:14-1889:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1529888:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Rovner</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2743</td><td>USA v.<br /> Gary France</td><td>criminal</td><td>04/07/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-07/C:14-2743:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1530248:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-3732</td><td>USA v.<br /> All Funds on Deposit with R.J.</td><td>civil</td><td>04/02/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-02/C:13-3732:J:Kanne:aut:T:fnOp:N:1527555:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Kanne</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-3732</td><td>USA v.<br /> All Funds on Deposit with R.J.</td><td>civil</td><td>04/02/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-02/C:13-3732:J:Manion:condis:T:fnOp:N:1527555:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Manion<br /> concurs and dissents</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-3738</td><td>USA v.<br /> Art Insurance Company</td><td>civil</td><td>04/02/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-02/C:13-3738:J:Kanne:aut:T:fnOp:N:1527556:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Kanne</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-3738</td><td>USA v.<br /> Art Insurance Company</td><td>civil</td><td>04/02/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-02/C:13-3738:J:Manion:condis:T:fnOp:N:1527556:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Manion<br /> concurs and dissents</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-3213</td><td>Brian T. Sullivan v.<br /> Michael R. Glenn, Jr.</td><td>bankruptcy from<br /> district court</td><td>04/02/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-02/C:14-3213:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1527449:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Posner</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-3818</td><td>Ramon Alvarado v.<br /> Corporate Cleaning Services, I</td><td>civil</td><td>04/01/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-01/C:13-3818:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1527164:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Posner</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2411</td><td>Tie Xia Chen v.<br /> Eric Holder, Jr.</td><td>agency</td><td>04/01/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-01/C:14-2411:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:fnOp:N:1527153:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>PerCuriam</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-2200</td><td>USA v.<br /> David Lockett</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:13-2200:J:Bauer:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526081:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Bauer</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1171</td><td>Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. v.<br /> Plano Molding Company</td><td>civil</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:14-1171:J:Flaum:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526426:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Flaum</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1189</td><td>Union Pacific Railroad Company v.<br /> Plano Molding Company</td><td>civil</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:14-1189:J:Flaum:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526427:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Flaum</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1237</td><td>USA v.<br /> Christian Miller</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:14-1237:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526510:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1585</td><td>USA v.<br /> Frank Jordan</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:14-1585:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526511:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-1592</td><td>USA v.<br /> Joshua Bowser</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:14-1592:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526512:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Tinder</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2069</td><td>USA v.<br /> George Curtis</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:14-2069:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526177:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td><span>Rovner</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Eighth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133067P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133067P.pdf</a> <b>04/10/2015 Hawkes Co., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3067
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Bright and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The Corps' issuance of
an Approved Jurisdiction Determination that plaintiffs' property
constitutes "waters of the United States" within the meaning of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, thereby requiring plaintiffs to
obtain a permit to discharge dredged or filled materials into the
"navigable waters, was a final agency action for purposes of the
Administrative Procedure Act, and the district court erred in dismissing
the case for lack of a final agency action. Judge Kelly, concurring.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133769P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133769P.pdf</a> <b>04/10/2015 United States v. Billie Batemon</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3769
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
[PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Wollman and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. District court's action in relieving
defendant's counsel of his appointment after the court imposed sentence on
defendant did not prejudice defendant; an argument that defendant meant to
move to withdraw his plea by his comments, in which he complained about
counsel's handling of the case and asserted his innocence, and was
prejudiced because an attorney would have better formulated the request,
is rejected as Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(3) forbids the withdrawal of a plea
after sentence is imposed; while the district court did not provide
defendant the information required under Rule 11(b)(1)(M), defendant has
failed to show that absent this error he would have proceeded to trial,
and the error was harmless; while the district court did not technically
comply with Rule 32(i)(1)(A)'s requirement that the court verify that
defendant had read and discussed the presentence report with counsel, the
error did not affect any substantial right.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141084P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141084P.pdf</a> <b>04/10/2015 United States v. Lodgy Jackson</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1084
and No: 14-1488
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
[PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Smith and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. The district court's advice
to defendant Jackson at the change-of-plea hearing that he could not
withdraw his plea even if the court did not impose the sentence the
government recommended fulfilled the court's obligations under Rule
11(c)(3)(B); Jackson's 400-month sentence was not substantively
unreasonable; no error in applying the first-degree-murder cross-reference
set forth in Guidelines Sec. 2A1.1 in sentencing defendant O'Bryant as
application of the cross-reference did not violate defendant's Fifth or
Sixth Amendment rights; Alleyne does not prevent application of the
cross-reference as application does not increase the penalty beyond the
statutory maximum or increase the mandatory minimum sentence; evidence was
sufficient to support the application; defendant O'Bryant's 330-month
sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141237P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141237P.pdf</a> <b>04/10/2015 United States v. Michael McMahan</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1237
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Ft. Dodge
[PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Bright and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. No error in applying a two-level enhancement
under Guidelines Sec. 3C1.2 for reckless endangerment during flight where
defendant fled at high speed from a drug arrest and then ran into a
person's home to elude capture.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141520P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141520P.pdf</a> <b>04/10/2015 St. Louis Effort For AIDS v. John Huff</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1520
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Beam and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Missouri Health Insurance Marketplace Innovation Act. Where
the district court enjoined any attempt by Missouri under its Health
Insurance and Marketplace Innovation Act (Mo. Rev. Stat. Sec 376.2000 et
seq)to regulate the certified application counselors created by the
Affordable Care Act (ACA) to assist in the enrollment of applicants under
the ACA, the district court ignored the limited preemption effect created
by Sec. 18041(d) of the ACA and should have issued a more limited
injunction enjoining only certain portions of the Missouri statute; the
district court's injunction is limited to Mo. Rev. Stat. Sections
376.2002.(3),(5) and 376.2008; Section 376.2010.1 - the Missouri Act's
remedial provision - did not implicate the plaintiffs' First Amendment
rights and the section should not be enjoined.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/142146P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">142146P.pdf</a> <b>04/10/2015 United States v. Leslie Armstrong</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2146
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
[PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. In a prosecution for
distribution of crack, the district court did not commit a Rule 404(b)
error by admitting evidence concerning an earlier, uncharged drug sale, as
the government proved defendant's participation in that earlier deal by a
preponderance of the evidence; the evidence was sufficient to support
defendant's conviction for distribution of crack; no error in sentencing
defendant as a career offender under Guidelines Sec. 4B1.1 as his 1991 and
1992 drug offenses were properly counted as separate offenses.
<b><span style="font-size: medium;">[ April 09, 2015 ]</span></b>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/132834P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">132834P.pdf</a> <b>04/09/2015 Kendrick Story v. Maxcie Foote</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2834
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff
[PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Bye and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Civil rights. In action alleging defendants violated
plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights by conducting a visual body-cavity
search of his person when he returned to the correctional facility from
outside the institution, the male officers conducting the search did not
violate plaintiff's rights by performing the search in a location where it
might be viewed by a female officer in a master video control room or
where other male inmates might be present; use of a derogatory term during
the search did not rise to the level of racial harassment; as a result,
plaintiff did not allege sufficient acts to support a plausible claim that
the search violated his clearly established constitutional rights, and the
district court did not err in dismissing the case prior to service. Judge
Bye, concurring in part and dissenting in part.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133255P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133255P.pdf</a> <b>04/09/2015 PHL Variable Insurance Company v. Midas Life Settlements LLC</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3255
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Loken and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Insurance. In action to rescind a $10 million life-insurance
policy, the district court did not err in rescinding the policy as it was
obtained through gross, material misrepresentations of the insured's worth
and income; where the insured simply signed a blank policy application
without supplying any truthful answers, Minnesota courts would not apply
their "Pomerenke rule" which provides coverage when the insured provided
truthful information and the insurer's agent recorded incorrect
information; Minnesota law did not impose a duty on the insurer to
reasonably investigate the policy application, and the insurer is not
equitably estopped from rescinding the policy.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133331P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133331P.pdf</a> <b>04/09/2015 United States v. Bradley Cook</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3331
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
[PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Bye and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. 18 U.S.C. Section 1591 was not
unconstitutionally vague as applied to defendant's prosecution for
commercial sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion; the plain language
of the statute gave defendant adequate warning that his conduct in
purchasing commercial sex acts was criminal, and the statute's mens rea
requirement is sufficiently narrow to avoid arbitrary enforcement.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141436P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141436P.pdf</a> <b>04/09/2015 Santiago Martinez-Galarza v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1436
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
[PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Bye and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Petition for Review - Immigration - Bloomington, MN Immigration
Proceeding. Petitioner did not establish eligibility for asylum as he
failed to show that his fear of persecution was on account of his
membership in a particular social group; petitioner's fear of harm was, in
fact, based on his fear of retribution from a person who had a personal
grudge against him; petitioner had waived his claims for withholding of
removability, CAT protection and voluntary departure, and the court would
not consider them.
<b><span style="font-size: medium;">[ April 07, 2015 ]</span></b>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133743P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133743P.pdf</a> <b>04/07/2015 Lucinda Dalton v. Manor Care of West Des Moines</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3743
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines
[PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Family Medical Leave Act. Plaintiff failed to establish that
she suffered from a serious health condition resulting in an inability to
work; her short-term conditions did not rise to the level of a serious
health condition and the FMLA did not protect her from discipline based on
her failure to complete work; even if plaintiff had a chronic serious
health condition so that a hospital visit was FMLA-protected, the district
court did not err in granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment
because defendant terminated plaintiff for reasons other than her work
absences.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141187P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141187P.pdf</a> <b>04/07/2015 Larry Flynt v. George Lombardi</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1187
and No: 14-1202
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Riley, Chief Judge, and Beam and
Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Civil Procedure. Flynt sought to intervene in two Missouri
death penalty cases, asserting he had an interest in sealed records in the
cases as a publisher and advocate against the death penalty, and the
district court denied his motion to intervene. To the extent the district
court denied the motions because it believed Rule 24(b) intervention was
the incorrect procedural mechanism, the court applied the wrong standard
in holding Flynt's generalized interest in the subjects of the two cases
did not justify intervention; the requirement that the movant's claim or
defense and the main action have questions of law or fact in common is not
generally required in cases where a party seeks to intervene to unseal
judicial records; it is the public's interest in the confidentiality of
the records that -in the language of Rule 24(b)(2)- is a question of law
in common between the parties and the would-be intervenor; accordingly,
Rule 24(b) intervention is the proper procedural mechanism for Flynt to
intervene in the case, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141954P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141954P.pdf</a> <b>04/07/2015 Calvin Carrick v. Mike Beebe</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1954
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Melloy and Gruender, Circuit
Judges]
Civil case - Civil rights. Plaintiff had no Sixth Amendment right to a
jury trial on his citations for violating municipal ordinances because
they were not serious offenses, and his Sixth Amendment and ancillary due
process claims fail.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/146032P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">146032P.pdf</a> <b>04/07/2015 Joseph R. Wilson v. Michael A. Walker</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-6032
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
[PUBLISHED] [Schermer, Author, with Kressel and Nail, Bankruptcy Judges]
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. The bankruptcy court did not err in finding
debtor Walker did not owe a debt to Wilson and that Wilson had no cause of
action under Section 523 as the contracts under which Wilson sought
recovery were unconscionable and Wilson had not shown any loss of
investment; likewise, there was no basis upon which to deny debtor Walker
a discharge under Section 727.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/146036P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">146036P.pdf</a> <b>04/07/2015 O&S Trucking, Inc. v. Mercedes Benz Financial Serv.</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-6036
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
[PUBLISHED] [Kressel, Author, with Schermer and Nail, Bankruptcy Judges]
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Debtor was not an aggrieved party and did not
have standing to appeal the order confirming its plan; appeal dismissed
for lack of jurisdiction.
<b><span style="font-size: medium;">[ April 06, 2015 ]</span></b>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133676P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133676P.pdf</a> <b>04/06/2015 LaMonte Martin v. Jessica Symmes</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3676
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Murphy and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
Prisoner case - Habeas. In Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012), the
Supreme Court announced a procedural rule that is not of watershed
magnitude and, as such, the decision does not apply retroactively on
collateral review; Batson challenge rejected.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141127P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141127P.pdf</a> <b>04/06/2015 Terry Draper v. City of Festus, Missouri</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1127
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
[PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Smith and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Employment. City's denial of plaintiff's attorney's request
to postpone a post-termination hearing did not deprive plaintiff of his
Fourteenth Amendment right to procedural due process in the circumstances
of the case; nor did it deprive him of his right to substantive due
process; no error in granting defendants' motion for summary judgment on
plaintiff's conspiracy claim; the undisputed facts establish that
plaintiff's actions as City Administrator were, at least, misfeasance, and
the City did not breach his contract by terminating him for the acts;
decision to terminate plaintiff was not arbitrary, capricious or
unreasonable and no violation of the Missouri Administrative Procedure Act
occurred.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/141428P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141428P.pdf</a> <b>04/06/2015 United States v. Marquis Leval Cotton</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1428
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
[PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Murphy and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. Officers had reasonable suspicion that
criminal activity was afoot, and they had grounds to support a Terry stop;
defendant's actions in reaching for his waistband, combined with other
circumstances, gave the officers a reasonable suspicion that defendant was
armed and dangerous and gave them grounds to detain him and conduct a
Terry frisk.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/142518P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">142518P.pdf</a> <b>04/06/2015 United States v. Kerajia Williamson</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2518
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
[PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Murphy and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. District court did not abuse its discretion by
making defendant's sentences consecutive; district court adequately
explained its sentencing decision, and the sentence it imposed was not
substantively unreasonable.
<b><span style="font-size: medium;">[ April 03, 2015 ]</span></b>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/142621P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">142621P.pdf</a> <b>04/03/2015 United States v. James Bolt</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2621
and No: 14-2623
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville
[PUBLISHED] [Murphy, Author, with Loken and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. No error in calculating the amount of loss in
this fraud scheme as the court could consider uncharged relevant conduct
in determining the loss; no error in imposing an enhancement under
Guidelines Sec. 2B1.1(b)(10); no error in departing upwards based on an
underrepresented criminal history.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/142704P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">142704P.pdf</a> <b>04/03/2015 United States v. Kendall Woodall</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2704
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. In this SORNA conviction, the district court
erred in imposing a special condition in defendant's supervised release
which prohibited from consuming alcohol or going to bars as the district
court's condition relied predominantly on a factual conclusion of drug
dependency without linking it to another factor such as mental health; the
court did not err in imposing a special condition barring unapproved
contact with minors as defendant had a serious sex offense conviction and
his failure to register as a sex offender and his failure to complete a
prescribed sex offender treatment program were directly related to
potential recidivism.
<b><span style="font-size: medium;">[ April 01, 2015 ]</span></b>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/04/133607P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133607P.pdf</a> <b>04/01/2015 Robl Construction, Inc. v. Andrew Homoly</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3607
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - St. Joseph
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Smith and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Contracts. The district court erred in granting defendant
Homoly's motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Robl's breach of
contract claims as there were genuine issues of material fact as to
whether Homloy authorized and personally guaranteed all or part of a loan
in accordance with the parties' agreement. Judge Smith, dissenting. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><pre><b><span style="font-size: medium;">[ March 31, 2015 ]</span></b>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141123P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141123P.pdf</a> <b>03/31/2015 United States v. Randy Never Misses A Shot</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1123
U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre
[PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Murphy and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal case. The district court's comments to the
prosecution at a sidebar regarding a possible deficiency in its evidence
and the court's decision to permit the government to reopen its
case-in-chief were not an abuse of the court' discretion and did not
prejudice defendant because the jury did not hear the comments and the
evidence at that point was, in any event, sufficient to convict defendant
on the count; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's convictions
for sexual abuse of a minor; the court did not err in rejecting
defendant's request for a lesser-included-offense of simple assault; no
error in admitting the testimony of six Rule 413 and 414 witnesses as the
court concluded the conduct covered by their testimony was similar enough
to the conduct charged to prove propensity; even if the admission of six
witnesses' testimony raised Rule 403 concerns, any error was harmless in
light of the other evidence of propensity; no error in excluding evidence
of past sexual assault against a victim under Rule 412. </pre>
Ninth Circuit:</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><table align="center" class="coa_dg_table" dir="ltr" id="c__contentTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-spacing: 0px; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); color: black; font-family: arial, Tahoma; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 0.2em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_0" style="background-color: #e2f3fc; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/10/12-17596.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">SKYE ASTIANA V. THE HAIN CELESTIAL GROUP</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-17596</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Oakland District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">McKEOWN, M.</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/10/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_1"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/10/12-57262.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">ANTHONY NIGRO V. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-57262</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">San Diego District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">GOULD, Ronald</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="imm_filing_case_code_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">oa</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/10/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_2" style="background-color: #fcfaf6;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/10/13-10095.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. RUBEN SAHAGUN-GALLEGOS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-10095</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Tucson District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">CHRISTEN, Morgan</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/10/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_3"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/10/13-55155.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. ANGELA AGUILAR</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-55155</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Los Angeles District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">OWENS, John</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/10/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_4" style="background-color: #fcfaf6;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/10/14-50113.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. ANTONIO URRUTIA-CONTRERAS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">14-50113</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">San Diego District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Gettleman, Robert</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/10/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_5"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/09/12-57315.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">C. W. V. CAPISTRANO USD</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-57315</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Santa Ana District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">WARDLAW, Kim</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="imm_filing_case_code_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">oa</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/09/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_6" style="background-color: #fcfaf6;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/08/12-16514.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">DONALD GOLDEN V. CALIF EMERGENCY PHYSICIANS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-16514</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">San Francisco District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/08/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_7"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/07/11-15472.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">DAVID BARBOZA V. CA ASSN OF PROF FIREFIGHTERS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">11-15472</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Sacramento District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">IKUTA, Sandra</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/07/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_8" style="background-color: #fcfaf6;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/06/13-35290.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">LESTER SHINAULT V. DICK HAWKS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-35290</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Portland District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">HAWKINS, Michael</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Prisoner</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="imm_filing_case_code_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">oa</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/06/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_9"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/03/12-15360ebo.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">BRIAN MCMONAGLE V. DON MEYER</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-15360</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Sacramento District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">THOMAS, Sidney</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Habeas</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="imm_filing_case_code_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">ebo*</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/03/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_10" style="background-color: #fcfaf6;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/03/11-10459.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. JORDON SIMMONS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">11-10459</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Honolulu District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">TASHIMA, A.</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/03/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_11"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/03/12-55726.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. JORDON SIMMONS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">11-10459</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Honolulu District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">TASHIMA, A.</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/03/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_12" style="background-color: #fcfaf6;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/03/12-55726.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">CHULA VISTA CITIZENS FOR JOBS V. DONNA NORRIS</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-55726</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">San Diego District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">REINHARDT, Stephen</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="imm_filing_case_code_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">ebop</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/03/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_13"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/03/13-50463.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. DAVID TAMMAN</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-50463</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Los Angeles District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Ezra, David</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/03/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_14" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/02/10-72239.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">CARLOS RENDON V. ERIC HOLDER, JR.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">10-72239</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Board of Immigration Appeals</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Agency</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/02/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_15"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/02/12-17245.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">AMERIPRIDE SERVICES V. TEXAS EASTERN OVERSEAS INC.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-17245</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Sacramento District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">IKUTA, Sandra</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/02/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_16" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/02/13-60023.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">PENSCO TRUST V. TRISTAR ESPERANZA PROPERTIES</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-60023</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">BAP, Santa Ana Bankruptcy Ct</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">OWENS, John</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Bankruptcy</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/02/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_17"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/02/14-30003.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. PAUL RICHTER</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">14-30003</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Missoula District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Orrick, William</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/02/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_18" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/02/15-15237.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">EMINENCE INVESTORS, L.L.L.P. V. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">15-15237</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Fresno District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">WALLACE, J.</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/02/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_19"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/01/12-99003.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">CLARK ELMORE V. STEPHEN SINCLAIR</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-99003</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Seattle District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">SMITH, Milan</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Prisoner Death Penalty</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/01/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_20" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/01/14-35943.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">LAURA JORDAN V. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">14-35943</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Spokane District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">SMITH, Milan</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/01/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_21"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/04/01/15-55176.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">RICHARD REYES V. DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">15-55176</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Los Angeles District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">HURWITZ, Andrew</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Civil</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">04/01/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_22" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/31/12-70779.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">JOSE MARQUEZ CARRILLO V. ERIC HOLDER, JR.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-70779</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Board of Immigration Appeals</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">FERNANDEZ, Ferdinand</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Agency</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/31/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_23"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/31/13-15234.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">TROAS BARNETT V. DAVID NORMAN</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-15234</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Fresno District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">OWENS, John</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Prisoner</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/31/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_24" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/31/15-99006.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">JOHN DOE V. ROBERT AYERS, JR.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">15-99006</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">REINHARDT, Stephen</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Prisoner Death Penalty</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/31/2015</label></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</pre>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Tenth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px;">See site. (Impossible to tell which non current-day opinions are published, and which aren't.)</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<a href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/clerk/opinions/daily">https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/clerk/opinions/daily</a><br />
<br />
Eleventh Circuit:<br />
<br />
<table class="gridtable" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-color: rgb(102, 102, 102); border-width: 1px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><tbody>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201311976.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Big Apple Consulting USA, Inc., et al</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">13-11976</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">6:09-cv-01963-JA-GJK</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-09-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201215183.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">USA v. Michael Renard Albury, Jr.</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">12-15183</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">8:11-cr-00410-SDM-TBM-1</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-09-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201314590.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">Earl E. Graham v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">13-14590</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">3:09-cv-13602-MMH-JBT</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-08-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201411639.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">Hugh A. Carithers, et al v. Mid-Continent Casualty Company</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">14-11639</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">3:12-cv-00890-MMH-PDB</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-07-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201410253.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">USA v. Mark Mason Alexander</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">14-10253</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">4:11-cr-00036-HLM-WEJ-1</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-07-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201315651.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">USA v. Emmanuel Asante</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">13-15651</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">1:13-cr-00350-SCJ-1</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-06-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201314141.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">USA v. Adrian Velazquez</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">13-14132</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">1:13-cr-20231-UU-2</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">CON</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-03-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201314141.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">USA v. Yolanda Sosa</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">13-14141</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">1:13-cr-20231-UU-1</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-03-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201412417.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">USA v. Alexander Dimitrovski</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">14-12417</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">1:13-cr-20557-KMW-3</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">04-02-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201411240.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">Richard Moss v. City of Pembroke Pines, et al</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">14-11240</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">0:11-cv-62595-WJZ</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">03-31-2015</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Federal Circuit:</span><br />
<table align="center" border="0" id="searchResults" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-spacing: 0px; border: 0px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin: 5px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; width: 100%px;"><tbody style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">
<tr class="even" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-10</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1297</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1297.Opinion.4-8-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">OPLUS TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. v. VIZIO, INC. [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="odd" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-10</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1728</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1728.Opinion.4-8-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">AUTOMATED MERCHANDISING v. LEE [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="even" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-09</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-5019</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">CFC</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-5019.Opinion.4-7-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INS v. US [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="odd" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-09</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1065</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1065.Opinion.4-7-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">INSITE VISION INCORPORATED v. SANDOZ, INC. [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="even" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-07</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1221</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1221.Opinion.4-2-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">ASTRAZENECA AB v. APOTEX CORP. [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="odd" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-07</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-5015</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">CFC</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-5015.Opinion.4-3-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">SHINNECOCK INDIAN NATION v. US [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="even" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-06</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-5060</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">CFC</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-5060.Opinion.4-1-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">PRAIRIE COUNTY, MONTANA v. US [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="odd" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-03</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1096</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1096.Opinion.4-1-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">VASUDEVAN SOFTWARE, INC. v. TIBCO SOFTWARE, INC. [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="even" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-02</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-5018</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">CFC</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-5018.Opinion.3-31-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">HOPI TRIBE v. US [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="odd" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-04-01</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1724</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1724.Opinion.3-30-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
<tr class="even" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">2015-03-31</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">14-1282</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">DCT</span></td><td style="border-right-color: rgb(212, 187, 155); border-right-style: solid; border-width: 0px 1px 0px 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1282.Opinion.3-27-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black;">APOTEX INC. v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. [OPINION]</span></a></td><td style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white;">Precedential</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">DC Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<opinion></opinion><br />
<div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/5EA721CFB3AA43BE85257E23004D7F97/$file/14-5122-1546682.pdf" style="background-image: url(http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/pdficon_small.gif); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #003470; padding: 1px 21px 1px 0px;" target="_blank">14-5122</a></span><span class="column-two" style="float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative;">Adirondack Medical Center v. Sylvia Mathews Burwell</span></div>
<div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"> </span><span class="column-two myDemphasize" style="float: left; font-size: 10px; font-style: italic; padding: 5px; position: relative;">04/10/2015</span><span class="column-three myFontExtraSmall" style="float: right; font-size: xx-small; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 156px;"></span></div>
<opinion><div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/F2D0905C077E1A8585257E20004F0E97/$file/13-1261-1546131.pdf" style="background-image: url(http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/pdficon_small.gif); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #003470; padding: 1px 21px 1px 0px;" target="_blank">13-1261</a></span><span class="column-two" style="float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative;">Jared Clark v. FLRA</span></div>
<div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"> </span><span class="column-two myDemphasize" style="float: left; font-size: 10px; font-style: italic; padding: 5px; position: relative;">04/07/2015</span><span class="column-three myFontExtraSmall" style="float: right; font-size: xx-small; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 156px;"></span></div>
</opinion><opinion><div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/F9BFDA703938D31685257E2000513599/$file/13-1278-1546136.pdf" style="background-image: url(http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/pdficon_small.gif); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #003470; padding: 1px 21px 1px 0px;" target="_blank">13-1278</a></span><span class="column-two" style="float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative;">Missouri Public Service Comm. v. FERC</span></div>
<div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"> </span><span class="column-two myDemphasize" style="float: left; font-size: 10px; font-style: italic; padding: 5px; position: relative;">04/07/2015</span><span class="column-three myFontExtraSmall" style="float: right; font-size: xx-small; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 156px;"></span></div>
</opinion><opinion><div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/DC3FFD7F7BB6BF8F85257E1C004F9135/$file/12-3007-1545764.pdf" style="background-image: url(http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/pdficon_small.gif); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #003470; padding: 1px 21px 1px 0px;" target="_blank">12-3007</a></span><span class="column-two" style="float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative;">USA v. Khaled Shabban</span></div>
<div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"> </span><span class="column-two myDemphasize" style="float: left; font-size: 10px; font-style: italic; padding: 5px; position: relative;">04/03/2015</span><span class="column-three myFontExtraSmall" style="float: right; font-size: xx-small; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 156px;"></span></div>
</opinion><opinion><div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/2F6EFE779F5708DB85257E1C0054C7F3/$file/13-7109-1545787.pdf" style="background-image: url(http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/pdficon_small.gif); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #003470; padding: 1px 21px 1px 0px;" target="_blank">13-7109</a></span><span class="column-two" style="float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative;">Nasrin Mohammadi v. Islamic Republic of Iran</span></div>
<div class="row-entry" style="float: left; margin-top: 5px; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"> </span><span class="column-two myDemphasize" style="float: left; font-size: 10px; font-style: italic; padding: 5px; position: relative;">04/03/2015</span><span class="column-three myFontExtraSmall" style="float: right; font-size: xx-small; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 156px;"></span></div>
</opinion><opinion><div class="row-entry" style="background-color: white; float: left; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small; margin-top: 5px; text-align: -webkit-center; width: 780px;">
<span class="column-one" style="clear: left; float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative; width: 110px;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/0C775AA11AFFF19A85257E1C004F9153/$file/14-1039-1545750.pdf" style="background-image: url(http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/pdficon_small.gif); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #003470; padding: 1px 21px 1px 0px;" target="_blank">14-1039</a></span><span class="column-two" style="float: left; padding: 5px; position: relative;">FiberTower Spectrum Holdings, v. FCC</span></div>
<div class="row-entry" style="background-color: white; float: left; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small; margin-top: 5px; text-align: -webkit-center; width: 780px;">
</div>
</opinion><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-10514604197464452782015-04-07T12:15:00.002-04:002015-04-07T12:15:24.911-04:00The Next Several WeeksWe' ll continue the list of weekly links for a bit longer. Our ambition is to get back to the individually abstracted and cited format as soon as possible.<br />
<br />
-MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-29592423037425084832015-03-31T14:27:00.002-04:002015-03-31T14:32:44.312-04:00New Opinons - Very Short FormSorry Global Legal Community, running late, so case names & links only for yesterday and today.. <br />
<br />
MB<br />
<br />
Firs<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">t:</span><br />
<table align="center" bgcolor="#CACAAA" border="1" style="width: 98%px;"><tbody>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">03/30/2015</span></td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-2490P-01A.pdf"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">12-2490P.01A</span></a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">12-2490</span></a></td><td><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> US v. Navedo-Ramirez<br /> District Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">03/30/2015</span></td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1018P-01A.pdf"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1018P.01A</span></a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1018</span></a></td><td><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> AFDI v. MBTA<br /> District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">03/30/2015</span></td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1018P-01A.pdf"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1018P.01A</span></a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1289</span></a></td><td><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> AFDI v. MBTA<br /> District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">03/30/2015</span></td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1286P-01A.pdf"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1286P.01A</span></a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1286</span></a></td><td><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> US v. Carpenter<br /> District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FAFFFD"><td align="center"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">03/30/2015</span></td><td align="center" nowrap=""><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1450P-01A.pdf"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1450P.01A</span></a></td><td align="center"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/paceruser.html"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">14-1450</span></a></td><td><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> Dutkewych v. Standard Insurance Company<br /> District of Massachusetts, Boston</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Second:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/767aa411-b311-4588-9f99-f68d10982a5f/1/doc/14-364_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/767aa411-b311-4588-9f99-f68d10982a5f/1/hilite/" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Taylor v. Rogich, et al.</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fourth Yesterday:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a 132003.p="" for="" href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/132003.P.pdf" style="color: #aa0000; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;" target="new" title="Opinion">132003.P </a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;">Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products v. Von Drehle Corporation </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fifth:</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30478-CR0.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">USA v. Cesar de la Cruz</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-70001-CV0pdf.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">William Speer v. William Stephens, Director</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-31083-CR0.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">USA v. Jose Pacheco-Alvarado</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px;"><span style="color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/12/12-70035-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Moises Mendoza v. William Stephens, Director</a></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: rgba(165, 99, 88, 0.498039); font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sixth:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0057p-06.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Patrick Winters </a></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
Seventh:<br />
<br />
<table cellspacing="3"><tbody>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-2200</td><td>USA v.<br />
David Lockett</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/31/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-31/C:13-2200:J:_:aut:T:fnOp:N:1526081:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td>PerCuriam</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>13-2234</td><td>USA v.<br />
John Tomkins</td><td>criminal</td><td>03/30/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-30/C:13-2234:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1525408:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td>Tinder</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="#FFF0C8"><td>14-2592</td><td>Linda Reed v.<br />
Columbia St. Mary's Hospital</td><td>civil</td><td>03/30/2015</td><td><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-30/C:14-2592:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:1525180:S:0">Final<br /> Opinion</a></td><td>Hamilton</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Eighth (Summaries from Circuit):<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141123P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;"><b>141123P.pdf</b></a> 03/31/2015 <b>United States</b> v. <b>Randy Never Misses A Shot</b>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1123
U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre
[PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Murphy and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal case. The district court's comments to the
prosecution at a sidebar regarding a possible deficiency in its evidence
and the court's decision to permit the government to reopen its
case-in-chief were not an abuse of the court' discretion and did not
prejudice defendant because the jury did not hear the comments and the
evidence at that point was, in any event, sufficient to convict defendant
on the count; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's convictions
for sexual abuse of a minor; the court did not err in rejecting
defendant's request for a lesser-included-offense of simple assault; no
error in admitting the testimony of six Rule 413 and 414 witnesses as the
court concluded the conduct covered by their testimony was similar enough
to the conduct charged to prove propensity; even if the admission of six
witnesses' testimony raised Rule 403 concerns, any error was harmless in
light of the other evidence of propensity; no error in excluding evidence
of past sexual assault against a victim under Rule 412. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141929P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141929P.pdf</a> <b>03/30/2015 Streambend Properties II, LLC v. Ivy Tower Minneapolis, LLC</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1929
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act. For the court's
prior opinion in the case see Streambend Props. II, LLC v. Ivy Tower
Mpls., LLC, 451 F. App'x 627 (8th Cir. 2012). District court did not abuse
its discretion by refusing to permit plaintiff to re-add a party whose
prior dismissal on the merits was not challenged in the earlier appeal;
plaintiff's Count alleging violation of Section 1703(a)(2)(A)&(C) did not
satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 9(b) because it failed to plead
intentional wrongdoing (scienter) and the district court did not err in
dismissing the Count; Rule 8 governed the Section 1703(a)(2)(B)
allegations in Count I of the complaint, and it was error to dismiss them
for failure to satisfy Rule 9; however, the Count failed to state a
plausible claim and the dismissal is affirmed; no error in refusing to
permit further amendment of the complaint; no error in granting defendant
Commonwealth's motion for summary judgment as there was no evidence it
made any representations or was involved in the sale of property to
plaintiff; the district court did not err in refusing to exercise
supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff's state law claims. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">Ninth:</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><table align="center" class="coa_dg_table" dir="ltr" id="c__contentTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-spacing: 0px; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); color: black; font-family: arial, Tahoma; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 0.2em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_0" style="background-color: #e2f3fc; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/31/12-70779.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">JOSE MARQUEZ CARRILLO V. ERIC HOLDER, JR.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-70779</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Board of Immigration Appeals</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">FERNANDEZ, Ferdinand</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Agency</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/31/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_1"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/31/13-15234.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">TROAS BARNETT V. DAVID NORMAN</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-15234</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Fresno District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">OWENS, John</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Prisoner</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/31/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_2" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/31/15-99006.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">JOHN DOE V. ROBERT AYERS, JR.</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">15-99006</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">REINHARDT, Stephen</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Prisoner Death Penalty</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/31/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_3"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/30/12-50373.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. FRANCISCO JIMENEZ-ARZATE</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">12-50373</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">San Diego District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/30/2015</label></td></tr>
<tr class="dg_tr" id="c_row_4" style="background-color: #fcfaf6; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/30/13-10116.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; color: #9c6f1c; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">USA V. TODD FRIES</a></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_num_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">13-10116</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_origin_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Tucson District Court</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="name_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">RAWLINSON, Johnnie</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="case_type_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">Criminal</label></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px;"></td><td class="coa_dg_td dg_left dg_nowrap" style="border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap;"><label class="coa_dg_label" id="date_published_0" style="color: #334d55; font-weight: bold;">03/30/2015</label></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">Tenth today:</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white;"><ul class="rss-items" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22px; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; white-space: normal;">
<li class="rss-item" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: left;"><a class="rss-item" href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/14/14-6119.pdf" style="color: #0088cc; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin-bottom: 1em; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">Siloam Springs Hotel v. Century Surety Co.</a>
<span class="rss-date" style="font-style: italic;">Filed On:March 31, 2015</span>
Docket #: 14-6119
United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma - Oklahoma City
Type: Published Opinion</li>
<li class="rss-item" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: left;"><a class="rss-item" href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-2176.pdf" style="color: #0088cc; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin-bottom: 1em; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">Greenbaum v. Bailey</a>
<span class="rss-date" style="font-style: italic;">Filed On:March 31, 2015</span>
Docket #: 13-2176
United States District Court for the District of New Mexico - Albuquerque
Type: Published Opinion</li>
</ul>
<div style="color: #333333;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;">Tenth yesterday: Unknown.</span></span></div>
<div style="color: #333333;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;">
</span></span></div>
<div style="color: #333333;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;">Eleventh:</span></span></div>
<div style="color: #333333;">
<table class="gridtable" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-color: rgb(102, 102, 102); border-width: 1px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><tbody>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201411240.pdf" style="color: #0b3157;" target="_top">Richard Moss v. City of Pembroke Pines, et al</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">14-11240</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">0:11-cv-62595-WJZ</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">03-31-2015</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="30%"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201314780.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;" target="_top">Carlos Zelaya, et al v. USA</a></td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">13-14780</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="25%">0:11-cv-62644-RNS</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="10%">NEW</td><td align="left" style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 6px;" valign="top" width="15%">03-30-2015</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div style="color: #333333;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;">Federal Circuit:</span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1282.Opinion.3-27-2015.1.PDF" target="_blank">APOTEX INC. v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. [OPINION]</a></span></span></div>
<div style="color: #333333;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;">
</span></span></div>
</pre>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-27366646299551247702015-03-30T12:44:00.004-04:002015-03-30T12:44:56.674-04:00No Post TodayWell, except for this one. Expect one tomorrow, one Wednesday, and then next one Monday. <br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-75646287191317582982015-03-28T12:30:00.000-04:002015-03-28T12:30:10.942-04:003/23 -- 3/28First Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1950P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Munyenyezi </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-2387P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">Home Orthopedics Corp. v. Rodriguez </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-2259P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Kantengwa </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1644P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">First State Insurance Company v. National Casualty Co </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1403P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Habibi </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1393P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Hufstetler </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1494P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Molina-Gomez </a><br />
<a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-2007P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">Advanced Flexible Circuits v. GE Sensing & Inspection </a><br />
<br />
Second Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/4/doc/14-1809_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/4/hilite/" target="_blank">United States v. Christine Wright-Darrisaw</a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/3/doc/14-941_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/3/hilite/" target="_blank">Sebrena Robinson v. Concentra Health Services,Inc</a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/2/doc/14-1410_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/2/hilite/" target="_blank">In re: Advanced Battery Technologies </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/1/doc/13-3790_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/22297eda-3e38-42c7-aef1-c0e51564ce96/1/hilite/" target="_blank">Concerned Home Care Providers, Inc. v. Cuomo</a><br />
<br />
Third Circuit:<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/142733p.pdf" target="_blank">Michael Torre v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance</a><br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/142700pa.pdf" target="_blank">EEOC v. Allstate Insurance Co</a><br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/142700po.pdf" target="_blank">EEOC v. Allstate Insurance Co</a><br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/141732p.pdf" target="_blank">Hernan Gonzalez-Posadas v. Attorney General United States</a><br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/141732p.pdf" target="_blank">Agency</a><br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/133611po.pdf" target="_blank">Phillip Fantone v. Fred Latini</a><br />
<br />
Fourth Circuit:<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/131603.P.pdf" target="_blank">Consolidation Coal Company v. Georgia Power Company </a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/137914.P.pdf" target="_blank">Mark Lee v. Harold Clarke </a></span><br />
<a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/131872.P.pdf" target="_blank">Robert Johnson v. American Towers, LLC</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/141086.P.pdf" target="_blank">Professional Massage Training v. Accreditation Alliance of Career Schools </a><br />
<br />
Fifth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-40924-CR1.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Juan Martinez-Lugo<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-10379-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Micah Phillips v. City of Dallas</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-20278-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Tammy Bryant v. Texas Dept of Aging and Disab, et<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30306-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Justin Richardson v. Axion Logistics, L.L.C.</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30416-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Angus Chemical Company v. Glendora Plantation, Inc</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-40403-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Ronald Hines v. Bud Alldredge, Jr., et al<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-50037-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Donnika Ivy, et al v. Michael Williams</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-50331-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Michael Toney v. Rissie Owens, et al</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-60217-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Auto Parts Mfg MS Inc. v. King Const of Houston, </a> (<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-60287-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">II</a>)<br />
<br />
Sixth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0048p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Elizabeth Goodwin v. City of Painesville </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0049p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Lexon Insurance Co. v. Aziz Naser </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0050p-06.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Raymond Burch, Jr. </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0051p-06.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Gerald Singer</a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0052p-06.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Jose Solano-Rosales </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0054p-06.pdf" target="_blank">St. Marys Cement Inc. v. EPA </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0054p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Environmental Protection Administration</a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0055p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Michael Keller v. Miri Microsystems LLC </a><br />
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0056p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Supplemental Benefit Committee v. Navistar, Inc. </a><br />
<br />
Seventh Circuit:<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-27/C:13-1769:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:fnOp:N:1524418:S:0" target="_blank">Marshall King v. Robert McCarty</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-27/C:14-2941:J:Tinder:aut:T:fnOp:N:1524163:S:0" target="_blank">USA v. Timmy Reichling</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-27/C:14-3104:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:1523999:S:0" target="_blank">Shaohua He v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-26/C:14-1100:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:1523368:S:0" target="_blank">USA v. Ambrosio Medrano</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-26/C:14-1278:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:1523369:S:0" target="_blank">USA v. Gustavo Buenrostro</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-26/C:14-2303:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1523624:S:0" target="_blank">Kevin Voigt v. Carolyn Colvin</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-25/C:13-2943:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:1522960:S:0" target="_blank">USA v. Jason White</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-24/C:13-3648:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1521896:S:0" target="_blank">Joyce Hutchens v. Chicago Board of Education</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-23/C:14-1419:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1521338:S:0" target="_blank">Lawrence Owens v. Stephen Duncan</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-23/C:14-8030:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1521097:S:0" target="_blank">Peter Metrou v. M.A. Mortenson Company</a><br />
<br />
Eighth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/113423P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">113423P.pdf</a> <b>03/26/2015 Rodney Washington v. American Airlines</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 11-3423
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - St. Joseph
[PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Bye and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Employment discrimination. There was no evidence that
plaintiff's job skills testing or the treatment he received regarding his
application for the position of machinist was based on race, and the
district court did not err in finding that race was not a motivating
factor for the decision to deny plaintiff's application for the promotion.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141356P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141356P.pdf</a> <b>03/26/2015 Selective Insurance Company v. Smart Candle, LLC</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1356
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Insurance. Because there are no allegations in the complaint
- in either form or substance - regarding misuse of an advertising slogan,
the insurer properly concluded it did not have a duty to defend the claim
against its insured Smart Candle.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141381P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141381P.pdf</a> <b>03/26/2015 United States v. Tamiko Grandison</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1381
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Loken and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. A police officer's testimony
regarding a government witness's character and reliability was admissible
under Rule 608(a) and did not constitute improper "bolstering;" even if
admission of evidence during defendant's cross-examination regarding her
misrepresentation of her criminal record on applications for federal
employment was error, it did not impact the jury's overall opinion of
defendant's credibility and was harmless in light of the strong evidence
of her guilt; the government concedes it was error for the district court
to impose an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2D1.1(b)(12) for running a
drug house and this error affected defendant's substantial rights; her
sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141741P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141741P.pdf</a> <b>03/26/2015 Menard, Inc. v. Terry L. Clauff</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1741
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln
[PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Loken and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Contracts. In an action holding defendant Clauff jointly and
severally liable for a contract he signed on behalf of an LLC before it
came into existence, the district court did not err in finding, based on
the summary judgment record, that Clauff was not authorized to obligate
the LLC to a lease assignment because the LLC not yet properly organized
under Nebraska law and could not transact business or incur debt that was
not incidental to its organization; assuming the parties intended the LLC
to receive the assignment of the lease, Clauff cannot escape liability
under Nebraska Revised Statute Sec. 21-2635 (repealed 2013) merely because
the parties did not intend him to be personally liable; however, the
matter should be remanded for further proceedings on the question of
whether Nebraska common law and/or Sec. 21-365 preclude Clauff's argument
that his liability under the Lease Assignment may be relieved or avoided
because the LLC came into existence, adopted the contract and commenced
performance. Judge Colloton, dissenting.</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/133253P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133253P.pdf</a> <b>03/25/2015 United States v. Fred Robinson</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3253
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
[PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. Agents could reasonably rely on binding
Supreme Court precedents permitting them to attach a tracking device to
defendant's vehicle at the time they did so, and the GPS evidence in the
case was properly admitted; counts alleging two different schemes for
federal programs theft were not misjoined, as the evidence overlapped and
evidence from each scheme would have been admissible in the separate trial
of the other scheme; further, the court instructed the jury that each
offense was a separate or different crime, thereby minimizing any
prejudice; Batson claim rejected; instructions on theft concerning
programs receiving federal funds were not erroneous, and the court
properly rejected defendant's proposed instructions as they did not
correctly state the applicable law; evidence was sufficient to support
defendant's conviction for accepting wages for work not performed at his
parking meter inspection job for the City of St. Louis as he was agent of
the City government which received federal funds; below-Guidelines
sentence was substantively reasonable; restitution order was not an abuse
of discretion.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141567P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141567P.pdf</a> <b>03/25/2015 Jose Torres v. Simpatico, Inc.</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1567
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
[PUBLISHED] Wollman, Author, with Smith and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Arbitration. Arbitration provision in plaintiffs' franchise
agreements was enforceable and was not unconscionable because of the costs
associated with individual arbitration proceedings; argument that the
agreements were unconscionable because they waived punitive or exemplary
damages and attorneys' fees went to the merits of the dispute and were for
the arbitrator to resolve; agreements were broad enough to permit
non-signatory parties, as third party beneficiaries of the agreement, to
invoke and enforce the arbitration provision.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141894P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141894P.pdf</a> <b>03/25/2015 E3 Biofuels, LLC v. Biothane, LLC</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1894
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
[PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Beam, Circuit
Judge]
Civil case - Negligence. The district court did not err in finding
plaintiff's claims arising out of methane plant explosion were barred by
Nebraska's two-year statute of limitations for professional negligence. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><pre><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/133253P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133253P.pdf</a> <b>03/25/2015 United States v. Fred Robinson</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3253
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
[PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. Agents could reasonably rely on binding
Supreme Court precedents permitting them to attach a tracking device to
defendant's vehicle at the time they did so, and the GPS evidence in the
case was properly admitted; counts alleging two different schemes for
federal programs theft were not misjoined, as the evidence overlapped and
evidence from each scheme would have been admissible in the separate trial
of the other scheme; further, the court instructed the jury that each
offense was a separate or different crime, thereby minimizing any
prejudice; Batson claim rejected; instructions on theft concerning
programs receiving federal funds were not erroneous, and the court
properly rejected defendant's proposed instructions as they did not
correctly state the applicable law; evidence was sufficient to support
defendant's conviction for accepting wages for work not performed at his
parking meter inspection job for the City of St. Louis as he was agent of
the City government which received federal funds; below-Guidelines
sentence was substantively reasonable; restitution order was not an abuse
of discretion.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141567P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141567P.pdf</a> <b>03/25/2015 Jose Torres v. Simpatico, Inc.</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1567
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
[PUBLISHED] Wollman, Author, with Smith and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Arbitration. Arbitration provision in plaintiffs' franchise
agreements was enforceable and was not unconscionable because of the costs
associated with individual arbitration proceedings; argument that the
agreements were unconscionable because they waived punitive or exemplary
damages and attorneys' fees went to the merits of the dispute and were for
the arbitrator to resolve; agreements were broad enough to permit
non-signatory parties, as third party beneficiaries of the agreement, to
invoke and enforce the arbitration provision.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141894P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141894P.pdf</a> <b>03/25/2015 E3 Biofuels, LLC v. Biothane, LLC</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1894
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
[PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Beam, Circuit
Judge]
Civil case - Negligence. The district court did not err in finding
plaintiff's claims arising out of methane plant explosion were barred by
Nebraska's two-year statute of limitations for professional negligence. </pre>
<pre>
</pre>
</pre>
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141623P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141623P.pdf</a> <b>03/24/2015 Henry Lyons v. F. Wayne Vaught</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1623
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
[PUBLISHED] Loken, Author, with Murphy and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Civil rights. In action alleging defendants retaliated
against plaintiff after he engaged in protected speech concerning
preferential treatment for student-athletes at the University of Missouri
Kansas City, the district court erred in determining defendants Vaught and
Bassa were not entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiff's First
Amendment retaliation claims; plaintiff failed to allege that the
defendants knew of plaintiff's protected speech when they declined to
recommend him for reappointment.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/132729P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">132729P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 Andre Porter v. Dave Dormire</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2729
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
[PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. Plaintiff failed to exhaust his
medical treatment claims through the Department's grievance procedure and
the district court did not err in dismissing the action; because dismissal
is mandatory, the district court erred in granting the defendants' motion
for summary judgment, and the summary judgment order is vacated and the
case is remanded for dismissal without prejudice. </pre>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141054P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141054P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 United States v. Jermaine Roy</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1054
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
[PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. In this prosecution for sex trafficking, the
district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to permit
defendant to show a video of the victim performing a sex act on him; the
district court did not err under Fed. R. Evid. 412(a) in refusing to
permit defendant to introduce evidence of he victim's past sexual
behavior; nor did exclusion of the evidence violate defendant's Sixth
Amendment rights; in any event, defendant's failure to file a timely
notice under Rule 412(c)(1)(B) was sufficient grounds to deny the request;
claim of Brady violation rejected as defendant had access to the relevant
information, which was in a published Arkansas Supreme Court decision, and
the government was unaware of the fact that the victim had made a false
statement to state police in an unrelated case.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141422P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141422P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 United States v. Cesar Gonzalez</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1422
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport
[PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Beam, Circuit
Judge]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing.UPS employees were not acting
as government agents, and the search they conducted of a package was a
private search and did not implicate the Fourth Amendment; temporary
seizure of a second package was based on a reasonable suspicion of
criminal activity; duration of seizure (three and one-half hours) was not
unreasonable; drug dog alert provided an adequate basis for issuance of a
search warrant; omission from the warrant application of the fact that the
drug dog initially also showed interest in another package was not the
kind of reckless disregard of the truth which requires a Franks hearing;
no error in denying defendant's request for a two-level reduction under
Guidelines Sec. 3E1.1(a) for acceptance of responsibility; district court
properly weighed the 3553(a)factors and considered defendant's request for
a downward variance; disparity between defendant's sentence and a
co-defendant's was justified by defendant's escalating pattern of criminal
conduct and the fact that he was on probation when he committed this
offense.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141425P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141425P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 Allan Rodgers v. Daniel Knight</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1425
and No: 14-1454
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
[PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Murphy and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Civil rights. Prosecutors had absolute immunity for filing a
criminal charge against plaintiff Greg Rodgers and the officers were
entitled to qualified immunity for recommending an unlawful use of weapons
charge; officers were entitled to qualified immunity on charge they
violated plaintiff's rights by seeking a search warrant; search was
reasonable and officers were entitled to qualified immunity for the scope
of the search; officers were entitled to hold the weapons as evidence and
returned them within a reasonable time after the close of the criminal
proceedings; plaintiffs' Second Amendment claims were correctly dismissed
as lawful seizure and retention of weapons does not violate the Second
Amendment; officers were entitled to qualified immunity on claim they
seized the weapons in retaliation for plaintiff's exercise of his First
Amendment rights since they had probable cause to arrest plaintiff and
seize his weapons; failure to train and instruct claims against the City
of Columbia and Boone County rejected; claim that a senior judge cannot
preside over the case is foreclosed by Eighth Circuit precedent, and claim
the judge should have recused was raised for the first time on appeal and
would not be considered. With respect to plaintiff Franklin's appeal, the
officers had probable cause to seek a warrant and arrest him and were
entitled to qualified immunity; guns seen in plain view during the
execution of a "drug warrant" could be seized as tools of the drug trade
and evidence of the offense; weapons could be retained for evidence
purposes; First Amendment retaliation claim was properly dismissed as the
officers had probable cause to arrest defendant; failure to train claims
were properly dismissed.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141664P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141664P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 Sherrita Harris v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1664
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
[PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Civil case. In an action on a statutorily-required bond, the district
court erred in determining the case was governed by Missouri's three-year
statute of limitations for an action upon a statute for a penalty or
forfeiture; the action was governed by the ten-year statute of limitations
for an action upon any writing for the payment of money or property (MO.
Rev. Stat. Sec. 516.110(1) RSMO 2000).
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141669P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141669P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 United States v. Acie Evans</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1669
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
[PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Bye and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. Police officers' decision to impound
defendant's vehicle was based on department policy regarding towing;
district court's determination that the manager of the apartment complex
where the vehicle was parked had asked officers to remove the vehicle was
not clearly erroneous; district court did not err in determining the
officers did not have an improper investigatory motive for the search of
the vehicle.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141787P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141787P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 United States v. Mark Brewer</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1787
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
[PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Loken and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Forfeitures. The government made reasonable attempts to notify Brewer of
the forfeiture proceedings by mailed notices and publication; the evidence
established Brewer was well aware of the seizure and could have filed a
timely claim; government proved a substantial connection between the
seized funds and drug activity, and the court did not err in forfeiting
the cash; Brewer did not meet his burden of proving innocent ownership;
seizure of the cash was not an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141928P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141928P.pdf</a> <b>03/23/2015 United States v. Elfred William Petruk</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1928
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
[PUBLISHED] [Bright, Author, with Loken and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. The evidence was not sufficient to establish
that defendant committed the offense of carjacking as the initial theft of
the truck was accomplished when the truck was unoccupied and his actions
in attacking someone who followed him and attempted to recover the truck
amounted to retaining rather than acquiring control of the stolen truck;
no rational trier of fact could conclude that in attempting to secure a
false statement in December, 2012 that defendant contemplated a
particular, foreseeable "official proceeding" as defined by 18 U.S.C. Sec.
1515(a)(1)(A), and his conviction for obstructing an official proceeding
under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1512(c)(2) is vacated; however, defendant's efforts
to obtain a false statements after the initiation of this federal
prosecution did amount to a violation of 1512(c)(2), and this conviction
is affirmed. Remanded for resentencing. </pre>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/133265P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133265P.pdf</a> <b>03/20/2015 Karl Adams v. ActionLink</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3265
and No: 13-3380
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
[PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Benton and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Fair Labor Standards Act. The district court did not err in
determining that certain of defendant's employees were non-exempt under
the Fair Labor Standards Act as they performed non-exempt promotional work
for the company to stimulate sales that would be made by someone else and
were not, themselves, outside salesman for FLSA purposes; nor were they
administrative employees as they did not meet the tests for administrative
employees established in 29 C.F.R. Sec. 541.200; the district court erred
in determining that one group of the employee plaintiffs had waived their
right to pursue additional claims against defendant by cashing proposed
settlement checks; the court joins other courts which have held that the
plain language of 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(c) requires an agreement by the
employee to accept a certain amount of back wages and requires the
employer to pay those wages; this involves more than simply tendering a
check and having the employee cash it, as an agreement must exist
independently of the payment; here, the language on the checks was
insufficient as a matter of law to constitute proper notice to the
employees and did not serve as a release of their rights.
<span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141595P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141595P.pdf</a> <b>03/20/2015 Tri-National, Inc. v. Canal Insurance Company</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1595
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Motor Carrier Act of 1980. Tri-National held a default
judgment against Canal's insured and was the real party in interest under
Missouri law; Alabama court did not render a final judgment on the merits
of Tri-National's present claim on the MCS-90 endorsement issue since that
claim was voluntarily dismissed, and the present claim was not barred by
res judicata; Tri-National could assert its rights as a member of the
general public under the MCS-90 endorsement and that fact that its insurer
had satisfied its claim did not preclude this action or absolve defendant
of its obligations under the endorsement. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/132918P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">132918P.pdf</a> <b>03/19/2015 Sletten & Brettin Orthodontics v. Continental Casualty Company</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2918
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Murphy and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Insurance. The policy in question excluded coverage for
intent-to-injure acts; since the complaint against the insured alleged
defamation with intent to injure,the policy did not provide coverage and
the insurer did not have a duty to defend the suit. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/132918P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">132918P.pdf</a> <b>03/19/2015 Sletten & Brettin Orthodontics v. Continental Casualty Company</b></span>
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2918
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Murphy and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Insurance. The policy in question excluded coverage for
intent-to-injure acts; since the complaint against the insured alleged
defamation with intent to injure,the policy did not provide coverage and
the insurer did not have a duty to defend the suit. </pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">Ninth Circuit:</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/27/09-71491.pdf" target="_blank">ROBERTO MALDONADO V. ERIC HOLDER, JR.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/27/13-30224.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. MARIA MOE</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/27/13-50136.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. LAWRENCE SHAW<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/26/11-16255ebo.pdf" target="_blank">ADAM RICHARDS V. ED PRIETO<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/26/10-56971ebo.pdf" target="_blank">EDWARD PERUTA V. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/26/09-99015.pdf" target="_blank">TEOFILO MEDINA, JR. V. KEVIN CHAPPELL</a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/26/13-35284.pdf" target="_blank">CROW TRIBAL HOUSING AUTHORITY V. USHUD</a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/26/09-99015o.pdf" target="_blank">TEOFILO MEDINA, JR. V. KEVIN CHAPPELL<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/25/13-30077.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. MICHAEL DREYER<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/25/13-10392.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. HEIDI HAISCHER</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/25/13-30239.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. AARON HYMAS<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/24/12-56520.pdf" target="_blank">CHRIS KOHLER V. BED BATH & BEYOND OF CALIF.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/24/13-55323.pdf" target="_blank">HECTOR NAVARRO V. ENCINO MOTORCARS</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/23/13-10475.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. MERLIN MARCIA-ACOSTA</a><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/23/13-35468.pdf" target="_blank">MTB ENTERPRISES V. ADC VENTURE </a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/20/12-15969.pdf" target="_blank">MARK MUNNS V. JOHN F. KERRY<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/20/13-55374.pdf" target="_blank">BRUCE LISKER V. CITY OF LOS ANGELES<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></a><br />
<a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/20/13-55808.pdf" target="_blank">CHRIS KOHLER V. EDDIE BAUER</a><br />
<br />
Tenth:<br />
<br />
<a class="rss-item" href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-3310.pdf" style="background-color: white; color: #005580; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 1em; outline: 0px;" target="_blank">Certain Underwriters v. Bartle</a><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;" /><span class="rss-date" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 20px;">Filed On:March 27, 2015</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">Docket #: 13-3310</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;" /><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 20px;">United States District Court for the District of Kansas - Kansas City </b><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">Type: Published Opinion</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">(The Tenth makes it hard to identify past published opinions -- see their site.)</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">Rest TK</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">MB</span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-20108695077695693392015-03-26T10:50:00.000-04:002015-03-26T10:50:14.967-04:00Sorry folks, no post todayAt worst, we'll do a comprehensive rundown this weekend.<br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-29684004594855378052015-03-25T11:14:00.001-04:002015-03-25T11:14:52.151-04:00Next update ThursdayCrick rose. Back to normal soon.<br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-6714847141938295012015-03-24T13:43:00.002-04:002015-03-24T13:43:46.799-04:00No posts todayComprehensive update, at least a list, tomorrow.<br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-31713089285553452352015-03-23T16:54:00.003-04:002015-03-23T16:54:39.984-04:00No post 3/23We'll do a comprehensive roundup tomorrow, probably early. <br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-6592275131337230482015-03-20T15:46:00.000-04:002015-03-20T15:48:00.598-04:00Short Form: 3/20<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Second Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/a8664fb5-c1de-4103-b83b-b6c170e99f9d/1/doc/13-4586_13-4589_13-4588_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/a8664fb5-c1de-4103-b83b-b6c170e99f9d/1/hilite/" target="_blank">Arzuaga v. Quiros, Faucher, Cieboter, et al.</a> -- Prisoner law - Where a petitoner received back SSA payments, it is not a cause for revocation of IFP (pauper) status, as they cannot access these finds while incarcerated; IFP does not require prisoner to exhaust all personal resources in costs of the appeals. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
Fourth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/121503.P.pdf" target="_blank">Amanda Smith v. R. Ray</a> S1983 - Denial of qualified immunity upheld, as excessive force need not be on all fours with that described in precedent to be clearly prohibited by the Constitution; tackling the suspect in response to an innocent question was too much.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/132088.P.pdf" target="_blank">Bonnilyn Mascio v. Carolyn Colvin</a> -- SSI/Administrative Law - ALJ erred in not specifically defining the other work that the petitioner was capable of; There is no per se rule for remand in these cases, but remand should be ordered where the ALJ's analysis sufficiently frustrates appellate review.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134635.P.pdf" target="_blank"> US v. Xavier Lymas</a> -- Sentencing - Court committed procedural error in not sufficiently explaining its reasons for the departure from Guidelines where it simply believed that the Guidelines didn't effectuate goals of sentencing, even in a 'mine run' case.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
Fifth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-50042-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Wendy Davis, et al v. Rick Perry, et al</a> -- Election Law/ Fee Shifting: Where a district during the pendency of a challenge adopts the court-authorized plan, the plaintiff is not necessarily entitled to fees where the specific challenges raised by the suit are not remedied in the plan.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-20564-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Justin Ortiz</a> -- Fourth Amendment: Given that the deft was told that he was free to leave, the stop was noncustodial, and no Miranda warning was needed prior to the admissions. Dissent: when they went into the government's car, things changed.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
Sixth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0048p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Elizabeth Goodwin v. City of Painesville </a> -- S1983: Denial of Qualified Immunity in tasering case.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0049p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Lexon Insurance Co. v. Aziz Naser</a> --- FRCP/ K -- Appeals clock ran from entry of amended judgment, not the simple ruling on the Rule 59(a) motion; as the Officer of the Corporation signed the instrument twice, once in personal capacity, once in corporate.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0050p-06.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Raymond Burch, Jr. </a> -- FRCP - When challenging a post-judgment ancillary order allowing a party additional time to file a motion, a motion to dismiss does not reach the question -- there must be a cross-appeal of the ancillary order.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
Eighth Circuit (Summaries from Circuit):</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/133265P.pdf" style="line-height: 15px; text-decoration: none;">133265P.pdf</a><span style="line-height: 15px;"> 03/20/2015 </span><span style="line-height: 15px;">Karl Adams</span><span style="line-height: 15px;"> v. </span><span style="line-height: 15px;">ActionLink</span><span style="line-height: 15px;">
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3265
and No: 13-3380
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
[PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Benton and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Fair Labor Standards Act. The district court did not err in
determining that certain of defendant's employees were non-exempt under
the Fair Labor Standards Act as they performed non-exempt promotional work
for the company to stimulate sales that would be made by someone else and
were not, themselves, outside salesman for FLSA purposes; nor were they
administrative employees as they did not meet the tests for administrative
employees established in 29 C.F.R. Sec. 541.200; the district court erred
in determining that one group of the employee plaintiffs had waived their
right to pursue additional claims against defendant by cashing proposed
settlement checks; the court joins other courts which have held that the
plain language of 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(c) requires an agreement by the
employee to accept a certain amount of back wages and requires the
employer to pay those wages; this involves more than simply tendering a
check and having the employee cash it, as an agreement must exist
independently of the payment; here, the language on the checks was
insufficient as a matter of law to constitute proper notice to the
employees and did not serve as a release of their rights.
</span></span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141595P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">141595P.pdf</a> 03/20/2015 Tri-National, Inc. v. Canal Insurance Company
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1595
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Motor Carrier Act of 1980. Tri-National held a default
judgment against Canal's insured and was the real party in interest under
Missouri law; Alabama court did not render a final judgment on the merits
of Tri-National's present claim on the MCS-90 endorsement issue since that
claim was voluntarily dismissed, and the present claim was not barred by
res judicata; Tri-National could assert its rights as a member of the
general public under the MCS-90 endorsement and that fact that its insurer
had satisfied its claim did not preclude this action or absolve defendant
of its obligations under the endorsement. </span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/132918P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">132918P.pdf</a> 03/19/2015 Sletten & Brettin Orthodontics v. Continental Casualty Company
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2918
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Murphy and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Insurance. The policy in question excluded coverage for
intent-to-injure acts; since the complaint against the insured alleged
defamation with intent to injure,the policy did not provide coverage and
the insurer did not have a duty to defend the suit. </span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
<span style="background-color: white;">
</span></span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ninth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/19/13-15145.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">ABDULHALIM ALI V. ROBERT ROGERS</a> -- Employment/Admiralty -- As the claims sounded in statutory contract, not Admiralty tort, the proper defendant was the government, not the ship's owner.</span></pre>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/19/12-55667.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">SOPHIA DAIRE V. MARY LATTIMORE</a> -- AEDPA - Deference to state court holding on Ineffective Assistance claim.</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/19/12-17098.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">BERNARD PICOT V. DEAN WESTON</a><span style="white-space: normal;"> -- Personal Jurisdiciton -- Insufficient purposeful availment even when the deft travelled to the forum state in order to make the agreement and the agreement had ties to the forum state.</span></span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/19/11-56949.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">FREDDY CURIEL V. AMY MILLER</a> -- AEDPA/Habeas - Two unadorned citations in summary denial of Habeas did not mean that the Court reached the merits of the claim in a manner that vacated the procedural default found by the court below; No equitable tolling of AEDPA SOL, even given pro se petitioner.</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/20/13-55808.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">CHRIS KOHLER V. EDDIE BAUER</a> -- ADA: Court erred in finding compliance, given statements in DOJ manual interpreting the Act.</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/20/13-55374.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">BRUCE LISKER V. CITY OF LOS ANGELES</a><span style="white-space: normal;"> -- S1983/FRCP: Police fakery of reports is not so inextricably tied to their testimony at trial so as to give them immunity; Motion for summary judgment on merits can't be reached here under ancillary jurisdiction.</span></span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eleventh Circuit:</span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201411111.ord.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="_top">Curtis J. Collins v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.</a> -- Summary denial of rehearing, as issue was waived by not being raised below.</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201413423.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="_top">George Russell Curtis, Sr. Living Trust, et al. v. William F. Perkins</a> -- FRE - Although summares based on reports were hearsay due to the underlying data, they were admnissible under the Business Records exception, which can be established using hearsay testimony.</span></pre>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201315874.cert.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="_top">USA v. Bobby Jenkins</a> -- Question certified to Florida: whether a guilty plea under a withheld adjudication counts as a conviction for purposes of being a predicate offense. (State courts had hinted yes, binding Circuit precedent said no.)</span></pre>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Federal Circuit:</span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/13-1630.Opinion.3-18-2015.1.PDF" target="_blank">SENJU PHARMACEUTICAL CO. v. LUPIN LIMITED</a> -- Patent: Obviousness. [Which isn't to us.]</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 15px;">
</span></span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span><pre style="background-color: white;"><span style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white;"><span style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">DC Circuit:</span></span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-color: white;">
</span></span><pre style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/B20C8E554C57E47F85257E0E004EF37A/$file/13-3032.pdf" style="line-height: 15px;" target="_blank">USA v. Luis Munoz Miranda</a> -- Crim/Extraterritorial jurisdiction: Unconditional guilty pleas waived all grounds for appeal except subject matter jurisdiction; Extraterritorial application of a statute goes to merits and is therefore subject to waiver of appeal in guilty plea; Whether the Act applies to a specific ship is a question of subject-matter jurisdiction for the courts and not an element to be found by the finder of fact; Vessels were in fact covered by the Act, given deference to intermediate factual findings below.</span></pre>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-color: white;">
</span></span><pre style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/F6378077D0ED557385257E0E004ECBE2/$file/13-3020-1543386.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Mark-Anthony Adams</a> -- Sentencing: Appeals waiver not subject to the miscarriage of justice exception despite bar of proffered medical testimony.</span></pre>
<span style="background-color: white;">
</span></pre>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-67090016799730576902015-03-19T11:59:00.000-04:002015-03-19T12:01:29.412-04:00Next Update TomorrowIt's a bit early, and there's only a handful up (one in the Fifth, a couple in the Sixth; one in the Eighth; one apiece in 11th & Federal Circuit), so we'll plan to post those in tomorrow's run & head out in search of some St. Joseph's Day cookies. Cheers.<br />
<br />
MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-77423995996355070052015-03-18T15:05:00.002-04:002015-03-18T15:08:34.960-04:00Short Form: 3/18<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">First Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1405P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">Vaello-Carmona v. Siemens Medical Solutions USA, </a> -- ADA: ADA and correlative Puerto Rico law claim survive the death of the plaintiff and can be inherited.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1136P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Ngige </a> -- Conspiracy/SOL - Deft claiming that prosecution for Conspiracy was time-barred relied on a different theory of the crime than articulated in the indictment. As there were overt acts in furtherance within the relevant time frame according to the indictment's theory of the conspiracy, the case is not time-barred; Sufficient evidence.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1423P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US, ex rel. Escobar v. Universal Health Services, Inc </a> -- FCA/Fraud: Complinace with appropriate regulations is a precondiiton of payment for purposes of the False Claims Act (and therefore, a breach of same gives the c/a); Claim pleaded with sufficient particularity.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Second Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/70b92b9e-ec71-421c-bcfc-dd5e4cedf5be/1/doc/14-1732_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/70b92b9e-ec71-421c-bcfc-dd5e4cedf5be/1/hilite/" target="_blank">Ricci v. Teamsters Union Local 456</a> -- Communications/SOP Web hosting company shielded from liability under safe harbor in the Communications Decency Act; Union's claims time-barred.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Third Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/134633p.pdf" target="_blank">John Cottillion v. United Refining Co</a> -- ERISA: Employees did not have to exhaust Plan-based remedies to vindicate statutory rights, as there was a fixed policy denying the claims; Early Retirement claims vested according to the terms of the Plan, so those denied the benefit have standing to challenge, notwithstanding the fact that the denial did not invade the statutory bottom limit for such benefits; "(I)mpermissible sur-reply" stricken.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sixth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0047p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Sierra Club v. EPA </a> -- Standing/ Environmental: Reasonable inference of direct increase of emissions due to challenged policy suffices for Article III Injury for Club member living in the metropolitan area; Chevron deference to Agency interpretation; State must assess whether company is takking all reasonable measures to abate pollutants, regardless of whether the regulatory threshold measurement is exceeded.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Seventh Circuit:</span><br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-17/C:14-1807:J:Bauer:aut:T:fnOp:N:1518299:S:0" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></a>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-17/C:14-1807:J:Bauer:aut:T:fnOp:N:1518299:S:0" target="_blank">Emir Lenjinac v. Eric Holder, Jr</a> Immigration: For a Convention Against Torture claim, Petitioner must establish preponderance of likelihood of adverse treatment, not merely that the potential harms are congruent with those envisaged by the statute; At one point, Court uses "fulsome" to mean "complete," causing minor conniptions on this end. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eighth Circuit (Summaries from Court)</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/142805P.pdf" style="line-height: 15px; text-decoration: none;">142805P.pdf</a><span style="line-height: 15px;"> 03/18/2015 </span><span style="line-height: 15px;">United States</span><span style="line-height: 15px;"> v. </span><span style="line-height: 15px;">Michael Munz</span><span style="line-height: 15px;">
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2805
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err when it
declined to consider a proposed Amendment to the guidelines in setting
defendant's sentence; sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
</span></span><pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;">
</span></span><pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/146034P.pdf" style="line-height: 15px; text-decoration: none;">146034P.pdf</a><span style="line-height: 15px;"> 03/18/2015 </span><span style="line-height: 15px;">Jack Bowman</span><span style="line-height: 15px;"> v. </span><span style="line-height: 15px;">Daniel J. Casamatta</span><span style="line-height: 15px;">
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-6034
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
[PUBLISHED] [Nail, Author, with Kressel and Schermer, Bankruptcy Judges]
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. The bankruptcy court did not abuse its
discretion by denying debtors' motion to reopen where their case had been
dismissed for cause before it was fully administered; no error in refusing
to hold a hearing on the motion as there is no requirement in Section 350
that the court provide a hearing on a motion to reopen.
</span></span><pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/146045P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">146045P.pdf</a> 03/18/2015 Daniel Gess v. Randolph Brooks Credit Union
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-6045
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Federman, Author, with Saladino and Nail, Bankruptcy Judges]
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Order granting Credit Union relief from the
automatic stay with respect to debtors' vehicle affirmed as the Credit
Union had a perfected security interest in the van and established that
its interest was not adequately affected. </span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/142805P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">142805P.pdf</a> 03/18/2015 United States v. Michael Munz
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2805
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err when it
declined to consider a proposed Amendment to the guidelines in setting
defendant's sentence; sentence was not substantively unreasonable. </span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
[PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Smith, Circuit
Judge]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Defendant Corey Turner lacked
standing to contest the issuance of warrants for Precise Location
Information on two other defendants' cell phones as he did not own,
possess or use the cell phones which were the objects of the warrants and
did not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the phones or the
location information; the government made the requisite showing of
necessity to justify the issuance of wiretap orders; assuming that Corey
Turner's cell phone was a tracking device for the purposes of the
procedural requirements of Rule 41, the combination order in the case,
granting both wire tap authorization and permission to seize PLI from
Corey Turner's phone, failed to meet a substantial number of Rule 41's
procedural requirements; while the court is concerned about the number of
Rule 41 violations in the case, Turner has failed to show any prejudice or
that the government acted in reckless disregard of the Rule, and exclusion
of the evidence is not the proper remedy for the violations; in order to
admit testimony from a co-conspirator regarding the meaning of certain
drug-related terms in intercepted calls, the government should have
qualified her as an expert; however, the error did not affect the jury's
verdict as she and other witnesses interpreted the terms without
objection; before admitting evidence regarding defendants' prior drug
convictions, the court should have required the government to explain its
purpose in offering the evidence to exclude the possibility that the
evidence was being admitted solely to prove propensity; any error in
admission of the evidence in this case was harmless in light of the other
evidence in the case; where only the video, without sound, of defendant
Anthony Turner's prior arrest was played, any error in playing the video
was harmless as the jury did not hear the statements to which Turner
objected; evidence was sufficient to support defendant Donald Turner's
conviction for conspiracy as it was up to the jury to determine the
credibility of the witnesses against Turner and the jurors were properly
instructed on their responsibilities, including weighing any benefits the
witnesses received for their testimony; evidence was sufficient to support
defendant Antonio Turner's conviction for conspiracy; Antonio Turner's
sentence was set by the enhanced penalty provisions of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 851
and any error in calculating the quantity of drugs attributable to him was
harmless; no error in admitting evidence of drugs distributed by
co-defendants where the distribution was reasonably foreseeable by
defendant Donald Turner; the Section 851 notice provided defendant Donald
Turner was adequate and any error in the notice did not deprive him of due
process; claims of ineffective assistance at sentencing should be raised
in a collateral proceeding under 28 U.S.C. Section 2255. </span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ninth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;"><a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/18/13-50506.pdf" target="_blank">USA V. ESTEFANI ZARAGOZA-MOREIRA</a> -- Crim. Pro: Border Agent had duty to preserve video, as it was manifestly relevant to deft's claim of Duress. </span></span></pre>
<pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 15px;">
</span></span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/18/12-35946.pdf" style="white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">SETH BAKER V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION</a><span style="white-space: normal;"> -- Class Actions: Denial of certification reversed (after stipulation to voluntary dismissal of claim with prejudice and without settlement given denial of attempt at interlocutory appeal); District court erred in holding that individual issues predominated over shared issues; Special Concurrence: denial of certification in a sister District is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of correctness.</span></span></pre>
<pre><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/18/11-35914.pdf" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">SEATTLE MIDEAST AWARENESS CAMP V. KING COUNTY</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; white-space: normal;"> -- Free Speech: Ads on busses are a limited public forum; denial of specific ad wasn't viewpoint-based , as all ads referencing the issue in question were banned; Dissent: Designated public forum was created by selling ads.</span></pre>
<pre></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Tenth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; margin-bottom: 1em; outline: 0px;"><a class="rss-item" href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/15/15-3011.pdf" style="line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 1em; outline: 0px; white-space: normal;" target="_blank">Nixon v. Pryor</a><span style="line-height: 20px; white-space: normal;"> -- Prisoner Claim: Actual innocence claim insufficient to toll Statute of Limitations.</span></span></pre>
</pre>
</pre>
</pre>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-23926223908070095172015-03-17T14:19:00.001-04:002015-03-18T15:17:00.038-04:00Short Form: 3/17<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><strike>Balance of summaries TK. - MB</strike></span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">First Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1909E-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Gray </a> -- Amended opinion. [cf. </span></span><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="https://youtu.be/EBHLcBxQZiM">https://youtu.be/EBHLcBxQZiM</a> ]</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1973P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">United States v. Brigham and Women's Hospital </a> -- FRCP: JMOL 50(b) motion can only restate those grounds raised in a 50(a) motion (failure to argue insufficient evidence at the wrap-up of the other side's case means that you can't argue insufficient evidence after the case is decided); sufficient evidence for finder of fact to rule for deft, even when deft calls no expert witnesses; In ruling on a Motion for a New Trial, court need not individually re-weigh evidence, but need only conclude that the finder of fact could reasonably decided as they did; No abuse of discretion in case (without written explanation) not being reassigned on remand, despite standing court rule to the contrary; Hard data underlying expert witnesses' findings can be inadmissible hearsay; No abuse of discretion in allowing Relator to be questioned as to his financial motives for bringing the FCA suit; No reversible error in jury instructions or special verdict form that divided liability findings between the defts.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1072P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Rossignol </a> Sentencing: No procedural error in within-guidelines drug conspiracy sentence not reduced due to deft being senior, upstanding member of the community where court says that it is increasing the sentence due to the fact that the deft was a senior, upstanding member of the community.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Second Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/4db2ddbc-23f9-45ad-b81b-044a5e1fe4cf/1/doc/13-3022_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/4db2ddbc-23f9-45ad-b81b-044a5e1fe4cf/1/hilite/" target="_blank">Fischer v. Smith</a> -- AEDPA: State Court still entitled to double deference on Ineffective Assistance claim resolved briefly and in the alternative. </span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fourth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/132370.P.pdf" target="_blank">Roman Zak v. Chelsea Therapeutics International</a> -- Securities; FRCP: Sufficient context-intensive strong inference of scienter in pleadings, given that the drug company left out a few hurdles to drug approval when talking to investors; Error in allowing court to take judicial notice of internal SEC documents showing that the defts did not transact the stock during the period in question was not harmless.</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134630.P.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Jorge Cornell </a> -- RICO, Sufficient Evidence.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/141195.P.pdf" target="_blank">Oteria Moses v. Cashcall, Inc</a> -- Bankruptcy, Arbitration - Court did no err in retaining piece of Bankruptcy action in face of compelled arbitration.</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fifth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/12/12-10659-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Kendrick Fulton</a> -- Prisoner litigation - petition was second/successive.</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sixth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0046p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Brenda Colosi v. Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc. </a> Discovery/Fees: Where one party delivers actual computer in response to demand for computer files, the court does not err in listing the required technical services as costs that can be potentially shifted against the party if otherwise prompted.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eighth Circuit: (Summaries from Circuit website)</span><br />
<span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/133252P.pdf" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px; text-decoration: none;">133252P.pdf</a><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"> 03/17/2015 </span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">Argonaut Great Central Ins.</span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"> v. </span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">Audrain County Joint</span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3252
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Hannibal
[PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Colloton and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Torts. The court had jurisdiction in this interlocutory
appeal over the question of whether defendant's purchase of insurance
waived the common law sovereign immunity it might otherwise have under Mo.
Rev. Stat. Sec. 537.600; the court lacked jurisdiction to address the
question of whether defendant's purchase of insurance also waived any
statutory immunity it might have under Mo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 190.307 as a
911 call center, as that statute does not extend to defendant a
substantive right to be free from the burdens of litigation; the district
court did not err in determining that defendant did not present sufficient
evidence that it and its insurer had a pre-existing agreement to attach a
sovereign immunity endorsement to the insurance policy and made a mutual
mistake when they failed to do so; the district court did not err,
therefore in determining defendant waived the common law sovereign
immunity provided by Sec. 537.600 through the purchase of insurance.
</span></span><pre><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141659P.pdf" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px; text-decoration: none;">141659P.pdf</a><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"> 03/17/2015 </span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">United States</span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"> v. </span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">Anthony Bearden</span><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1659
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
[PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Bye and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Defendant lacked standing to
challenge police officers' entry onto another individual's property and
the resulting seizure of evidence from that property; officers had a
reasonable, articulable suspicion that defendant was engaged in criminal
activity and his detention was justified; defendant consented to a search
of his home; the district court did not err in classifying defendant as a
career offender under Guidelines Sec. 4B1.1 as his Missouri conviction for
second-degree burglary qualified as crime of violence. </span></span><pre><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"> </span></span><pre><pre style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/142772P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">142772P.pdf</a> 03/17/2015 United States v. Bobby Clark, Jr.
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-2772
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Smith and Colloton, Circuit
Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. No error in imposing enhancements under both
Guidelines Sections 2G2.1(b)(2)(A) and 2G2.1(b)(4) as application of both
enhancements is not impermissible double counting; alternatively, the
court clearly stated it would impose the same sentence with or without the
enhancements, and any error in imposing them would be harmless. </span></pre>
<pre style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ninth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: #e2f3fc; color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/16/12-16665.pdf" style="background-color: #e2f3fc; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">FAIRFIELD-SUISUN USD V. EDU-CA</a> -- </span><span style="background-color: #fafffd; color: #38761d; font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; white-space: normal;">(Statutory) Standing: School Districts do not have implied right of action under IDEA.</span></pre>
<pre style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: #fafffd; color: #38761d; font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; white-space: normal;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><pre><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Federal Circuit:</span></pre>
</pre>
<pre style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre><span style="color: #38761d; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1060.Opinion.3-12-2015.1.PDF" target="_blank">MOBILEMEDIA IDEAS LLC v. APPLE INC.</a> -- Patent.</span></span></pre>
</pre>
</pre>
</pre>
</pre>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-43582520246591246462015-03-16T13:31:00.002-04:002015-03-16T13:35:08.020-04:00Short Form 3/16Third Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/122283p.pdf" target="_blank">Zachary Wilson v. Secretary Pennsylvania Departm</a> -- Prisoner Habeas - District Courts have jurisdiction over 60(b) motions seeking to modify grants of the Writ; Where a prisoner seeks to prevent retrial by filing a Rule 60(b) motion after the State has not retried him or her according to the Writ, he or she must first exhaust State remedies where there are new substantive questions of fact or law.<br />
<br />
Eighth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141782P.pdf" target="_blank">Jerry Capps v. David Olson</a> -- S1983 - Denial of qualified immunity for police officer who shot suspect, as, among other things, the first wound was in the suspect's back.<br />
<br />
Tenth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/14/14-5026.pdf" target="_blank">United States v. Cuevas-Bravo</a> -- Sentencing - below-Guidlelines sentence upheld as presumptively reasonable against implicit challenges to Violent Burglary predicate, as, contrary to the stipulations in the PSR, the site wasn't a dwelling, and no violence was involved.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/14/14-3159.pdf" target="_blank">Jones v. McHugh</a> -- Employment Law (Military) Position being made non-supervisory to ensure compliance with regs suffices for sufficient non-discriminatory motive to defeat per se showing of discrimination, Plaintiff did not respond; Quite a few swipes at <i>pro se</i> brief.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/14/14-1012.pdf" target="_blank">EEOC v. Beverage Distributors Company</a> Employment Law - Remedies/ Jury Instructions -- No error in tax offset, as jury awards need not be atypical to justify the offset; Error in jury instruction that required direct proof of direct threat as justification for adverse employment action consequent upon disability, the standard is reasonable belief.<br />
<br />
Federal Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1321.Opinion.3-12-2015.1.PDF" target="_blank">ENZO BIOCHEM INC. v. APPLERA CORP.</a> Patent - In Statement of Claim, the phrase "At least one component" establishes that there are multiple components to the system. Dissent: The D-vil you say.<br />
<br />
<br />
NB, these checks are happening earlier in the day than before, so a lot of opinions will show up in the following day's feed.<br />
<br />
-MBUnknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-34971140120537472012015-03-14T13:39:00.001-04:002015-03-16T14:06:56.792-04:003/13 Short Form<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Crick rose. Links only for the nonce, possibly summaries Monday. </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">-MB</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"></span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
First Circuit:</span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-1498U-01A.pdf" target="_blank">Vazquez-Baldonado v. Domenech</a> -- FRCP - Where plaintiff has been given leave to amend complaint to state RICO cause of action, no second leave to amend need be given if they don't properly plead the predicate offenses in the Amended complaint.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1909P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Gray</a> -- Jury Instructions / Crim -- Definitions of Malice.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1697U-01A.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Cruickshank v. Cook, Jr. </span></a></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fourth Circuit:</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/132488.P.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Dawnn McCleary-Evans v. Maryland Department of Trans </span></a></span></div>
<div>
<a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134764.P.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">US v. Tamny Westbrooks</span></a></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fifth Circuit:</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-60684-CV0.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">BMC Software, Incorporated v. CIR</span></a></div>
<div>
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-10085-CV0.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Keva Sampson v. ASC Industries</span></a></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sixth Circuit:</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0043p-06.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">USA v. Gerald Singer </span></a></div>
<div>
<a href="http://gwyn%20r.%20hartman%20revocable%20living%20trust%20v.%20s.%20mich.%20bancorp%2C%20inc./" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Gwyn R. Hartman Revocable Living Trust v. S. Mich. Bancorp, Inc. </span></a></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Seventh Circuit:</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<div>
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-13/C:14-1384:J:Kanne:aut:T:fnOp:N:1516453:S:0" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">USA v. Booker Sewell</span></a></div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-13/C:14-2179:J:Posner:dis:T:aOp:N:1517013:S:0" target="_blank">Mohamed Bouras v. Eric Holder, Jr.</a> (<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-13/C:14-2179:J:_:aut:T:fnOpW:N:1516995:S:0" target="_blank">Amended</a>)</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eighth Circuit (summaries from Court):</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/133379P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">133379P.pdf</a> 03/13/2015 Branden Clark v. Leann Bertsch
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3379
U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo
[PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Murphy and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Prisoner case - Habeas. There is an intra-circuit split on the issue of
whether a state appellate court's plain-error review of an unpreserved and
otherwise procedurally defaulted claim "cures" the default and open the
door for collateral review; following the earliest panel opinion, as the
court is required to do, the panel hold Hayes v. Lockhart, 766 F.2d 1247
(8th Cir. 1985) governs in the circuit; Hayes holds a federal habeas
cannot reach an otherwise unpreserved and procedurally defaulted claim
merely because a reviewing state court analyzed that claim for plain
error; the district court's judgment dismissing the habeas petition is
affirmd. </span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="background-color: white;"><pre style="color: #333333; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141094P.pdf" style="color: #10477d; text-decoration: none;">141094P.pdf</a> 03/13/2015 United States v. Ronnie Fire Cloud
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1094
U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Aberdeen
[PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Murphy and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. Evidence was sufficient to support
defendant's convictions for abusive sexual contact and attempted
aggravated sexual abuse as the evidence was sufficient for a jury to infer
that he restrained the victim, thereby supplying each count's force
requirement.
</span></pre>
<pre style="color: #333333; line-height: 15px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ninth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre style="color: #333333; line-height: 15px;">
</pre>
<pre style="color: #333333; line-height: 15px;"><a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/13/12-56726.pdf" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;" target="_blank">ROBERT REID V. JOHNSON & JOHNSON</a></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Tenth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><a href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-2074.pdf" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;" target="_blank">Quinn v. Young</a></pre>
<pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eleventh Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201411036.pdf" target="_blank">John Lary v. Trinity Physician Financial & Insurance Services, et al</a></span></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Federal Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1188.Opinion.3-11-2015.1.PDF" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;" target="_blank">GPX INTERNATIONAL TIRE CORP. v. US [OPINION]</a></pre>
<pre><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-3048.Opinion.3-11-2015.1.PDF" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">GARCIA v. DHS [OPINION]</span></a></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">DC Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/650E1D405AD8DA3B85257E07004DA99F/$file/13-5374-1542137.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Wilfred Rattigan v. Eric Holder, Jr.</span></a></pre>
</pre>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-10603887143555539422015-03-13T13:44:00.001-04:002015-03-13T13:44:08.731-04:00Friday's post will happen SaturdayToday's cases will be posted tomorrow. If the crick don't rise. <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
-MB</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-35512428846429878232015-03-12T14:43:00.000-04:002015-03-12T14:45:26.650-04:00Short Form 3/12First Circuit:<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-1626P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AG</a> -- 60(b) motion cannot be used to collaterally attack a preliminary injunction; civil contempt fines in excess of the judgment amount are permissible, but have to be capped at some point so that they don't infinitely increase; alternative service was acceptable.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/13-2525P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Rojas</a> -- Appeal waiver in plea deal that doesn't recommend terms for supervised release still bars appeal of sentence terms imposing conditions on supervised release.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1252P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">Raymond James Financial Servic v. Fenyk</a> -- Arbitration - Statute of limitations not offended by award, as it was evolving at the time; Award under statute different from that claimed by the plaintiff does not indicate a manifest disregard of the law. Circuit split on the issue flagged.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/14-1603P-01A.pdf" target="_blank">AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AG</a> -- Where deft corporation is at home in the forum state and makes a fraudulent transfer of assets out of the forum state, ancillary jurisdiction over other companies can be established (vague in decision, probably clearer in District Ct. opinion.); Tortious interference sufficiently pleaded; Entry of default judgment as discovery sanction wasn't an abuse of discretion; No need for evidentiary hearing before award of damages.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;">Second Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/1513595c-319d-4708-93f9-1833559fd550/1/doc/14-4574_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/1513595c-319d-4708-93f9-1833559fd550/1/hilite/" style="font-family: Arial;" target="_blank">Prabhudial v. Holder</a><span style="font-family: Arial;"> -- Immigration: Agency may Constitutionally hold an argument (that a categorical instead of modified categorical approach was incorrectly used in offense determination) waived if not timely raised. Circuit courts therefore have no jurisdiction over the appeal.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
Fourth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134835.P.pdf" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" target="_blank">US v. Keith Reed</a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14px;"> -- Use of cell phone tracking map at trial that used deft's names instead of phone numbers was not an abuse of discretion; Post-arrest labeling of cell phone bag was not sufficiently testimonial to trigger Confrontation Clause (harmless error, as otherwise attributable); Sufficient evidence for convictions.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/134464.P.pdf" target="_blank">US v. Marco Flores-Alvarado</a> -- Amended Opinion</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Fifth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-11305-CV0.pdf" target="_blank">Ralph Janvey, et al v. Golf Channel, Incorporated,</a> -- State can reach under fraudulent transfer law advertising expenses paid by Ponzi scheme. Although they had market value, they did not provide even speculative benefit to creditors.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-60323-CV1.pdf" style="font-size: 14px;" target="_blank">Halliburton, Incorporated v. LABR</a><span style="font-size: 14px;"> -- Dissent from denial of en banc - Court should make a firm rule as to when the disclosure of a complainant's identity constitutes an adverse employment action.</span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30122-CR0.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Robert Kaluza, et al</a> -- District Court holding that federal law did not apply to offshore drilling rig can't be bootstrapped into defts jurisdiction argument,as there was no cross-appeal by defts and the choice of law and jurisdictional elements of the statute are different; No error in District Court's use of ejustem generis to limit the ambiguous/general term in the statute to those persons responsible for the transportative functions of the vessel, thereby ruling out oil rig drilling employees.<br />
<br />
<br />
Sixth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0041p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Dawson Wise v. Zwicker & Associates PC</a> -- State debt collection practices statute claim properly dismissed, as it doesn't apply to dealings between a consumer and a financial institution; Court must conduct interest analysis to determine if fee-shifting provision fundamentally offends public policy of forum state when the law of another jurisdiction is being applied.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0042p-06.pdf" target="_blank">Alfredo Montanez-Gonzalez v. Eric Holder, Jr.</a> -- Immigration - even where refusal to consider a certain factor barring removal was constitutional error, prejudice must be shown; the phrase "on balance" does not establish that the court engaged in inappropriate balancing (as opposed to aggregation).</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;">Seventh Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #fafffd;"></span><br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-12/C:14-1496:J:Manion:aut:T:fnOp:N:1515738:S:0" target="_blank">Kevin P. Gerard v. Michael J. Gerard</a> -- Bankruptcy: Tort verdict against bankruptcy petitioner must be considered in totality to determine whether it was for malicious and willful harm, and therefore the basis for an undischargeable debt.<br />
<br />
<br />
Ninth Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/11/13-70544.pdf" style="background-color: #e2f3fc; color: #9c6f1c; font-family: arial, Tahoma; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">NRDC V. USEPA</a> -- Chevron deference to EPA rulemaking creating alternative enforcement mechanism.<br />
<br />
<a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/11/12-17828.pdf" style="background-color: #e2f3fc; color: #9c6f1c; font-family: arial, Tahoma; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold;" target="" title="Case Title">CHRIS TAYLOR V. JOHN CHIANG</a> -- Constitutional concerns as to the appropriate means of locating owners of lost property vary by pre-escheat requirements and post-escheat requirements.<br />
<br />
<br />
Eleventh Circuit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201411590.pdf" style="color: #0b3157; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;" target="_top">SE Property Holdings, LLC v. Seaside Engineering & Surveying, Inc.</a> -- Bankruptcy court may issue non-debtor releases of debt where necessary to preserve the viability of the post-petition entity.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201313780.pdf" style="color: #0b3157; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;" target="_top">USA v. Shedrick D. Hollis</a> -- Evidence found in protective sweep of third-party residence admissible; No abuse of discretion in barring expert testimony on fingerprint comparison from expert on fingerprint sufficiency based solely on the averral of the expert that the two are identical.<br />
<br />
<br />
Federal Circuit<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: start;">
<a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-5085.Opinion.3-10-2015.1.PDF" style="background-color: #fff8f0; background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; color: #1c2e54; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-align: center;">BANNUM, INC. v. US </a> -- As bidder for government contract did not formally object to solicitation prior to the award, post-award challenges are waived.</div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<br />
(We'd like to get back to individual postings to help enable the tags function, but time, like an e'er rolling stream is moving a bit fast at the moment. MB)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-3116395903183964842015-03-11T14:26:00.002-04:002015-03-11T14:26:49.771-04:00Short Form: 3/11<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Second Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/829e6547-ede8-4bce-9e3a-c78876006984/1/doc/13-4880_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/829e6547-ede8-4bce-9e3a-c78876006984/1/hilite/" target="_blank">United States of America v. Foreste</a> -- 4A: Successive investigatory stops should be considered together where the probable cause for the stop and the basis for extending the stop are the same. Where the reason for extending the duration of the stop is different (as here), they may be considered separately; field performance reports of canine units are relevant and susceptible to discovery requests.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/829e6547-ede8-4bce-9e3a-c78876006984/2/doc/13-4404_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/829e6547-ede8-4bce-9e3a-c78876006984/2/hilite/" target="_blank">Stryker v. Securities and Exchange Commission</a> -- Administrative Law: Chevron deference to SEC holding that a pre-statute tip is ineligible for a reward under the statute. Alternative holding: statute not ambiguous. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/829e6547-ede8-4bce-9e3a-c78876006984/3/doc/13-2974_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/829e6547-ede8-4bce-9e3a-c78876006984/3/hilite/" target="_blank">Rivas v. Fischer</a> -- Habeas ordered on remand, as no reasonable finder of fact could determine that counsel was not ineffective.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Third Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/141010p.pdf" target="_blank">Ashley McMaster v. Eastern Armored Services Inc</a> -- FLSA -- Employee is subject to the Act and therefore eligible for overtime, as she is within the small-truck correction to the truck driver carve-out in the Act.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Fourth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/141332.P.pdf" target="_blank">Fraternal Order of Police v. WMATA</a> -- Subsequent unrelated dismissal of employee ordered reinstated by arbitration does not violate the arbitration order; Grievances should first be addressed by the mechanism in the collective bargaining agreement.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/138021.P.pdf" target="_blank">Alfredo Prieto v. Harold Clarke</a> -- Due Process: Prisoner does not have liberty interest sufficient to challenge harsh and atypical conditions on "Death Row," as there is no valid expectation of avoiding these conditions when sentenced for a capital crime.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sixth Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0040p-06.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">USA v. Manuel Soto </span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0040p-06.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> USA v. Hector Santana </span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0040p-06.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> USA v. Christopher Espinoza</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0040p-06.pdf" target="_blank">USA v. Juan Respardo-Ramirez</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Seventh Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-11/C:14-1923:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1515115:S:0" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Scott Reeder v. Michael Madigan</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-11/C:14-2536:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:fnOp:N:1515069:S:0" target="_blank">Saley Souley v. Eric Holder, Jr.</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eighth Circuit (Summaries from Court):</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/131748P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">131748P.pdf</a> 03/11/2015 United States v. Arthur Chappell
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-1748
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Smith and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law. For the court's prior opinion remanding the
case for a new trial based on an error in the jury instructions, see U.S.
v. Chappell, 665 F.3d 1012 (8th Cir. 2012). On remand, the district court
did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's motion to reopen the
record on the issue of probable cause for defendant's arrest; police had
probable cause to arrest defendant even if the issue were reopened; claim
of vindictive prosecution rejected, as the new charges added after remand
concern different criminal acts against mostly difference victims. </span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre style="line-height: 15px;"><pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141619P.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;">141619P.pdf</a> 03/11/2015 St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc. v. Thomas Tormey, Jr.
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1619
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Wollman, Circuit
Judge]
Civil case - Contracts. Because plaintiff failed to present evidence that
a claimed "walk-away"agreement releasing him from liability to repay a
loan was in writing as required by Minn. Stat. Sec. 513.33, the district
court did not err in granting defendant judgment as a matter of law on
this defense or on its collection claim; plaintiff's counterclaims were
time-barred; plaintiff failed to object under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a)to the
magistrate's order denying certain of his discovery requests, and the
court was without jurisdiction to review the issue. </span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ninth Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/10/12-55289.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">CPR FOR SKID ROW V. CITY OF LOS ANGELES</span></a></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/10/12-36026.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">AIRCRAFT SERVICE INT'L V. WORKING WASHINGTON</span></a></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/10/12-15362.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">MARGARET RUDIN V. CAROLYN MYLES</span></a></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/11/13-70544.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">NRDC V. USEPA</span></a></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/11/12-17828.pdf" style="line-height: normal; white-space: normal;" target="" title="Case Title">CHRIS TAYLOR V. JOHN CHIANG</a></span></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Federal Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; border: 0px; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-align: center; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-5067.Opinion.3-9-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; border: 0px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-align: center; white-space: normal;">AMERGEN ENERGY COMPANY, LLC v. US </a></span></pre>
<pre>
</pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">DC Circuit:</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/8B6AB6641655E38085257E0400525346/$file/13-7151-1541465.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Stone & Webster, Inc. v. Georgia Power Company</span></a></span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/D4F30C03B94F4C7385257E0400525367/$file/14-1143-1541471.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Airlines for America v. TSA</span></a></span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
</span></span></pre>
<pre><span style="background-color: white; line-height: normal; white-space: normal;"><a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/52F5E2E88ED4A4A585257E0400525380/$file/14-5082-1541499.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Meina Xie v. John Kerry</span></a></span></pre>
</pre>
<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-3618313243718141302015-03-10T10:59:00.002-04:002015-03-10T10:59:36.273-04:00Short form<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Seventh:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-09/C:13-3291:J:Flaum:aut:T:fnOp:N:1513890:S:0" target="_blank">Walter Love v. </a><a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-09/C:13-3291:J:Flaum:aut:T:fnOp:N:1513890:S:0" target="_blank">JP Cullen & Sons, Incorporated</a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-09/C:13-3353:J:Williams:aut:T:fnOp:N:1513569:S:0" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Official Committee of Unsecure v. Rudolph Randa</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ninth:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/09/11-17187.pdf" style="font-size: 14px;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">NORTHSTAR FINANCIAL ADVISORS, V. SCHWAB INVESTMENTS</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/09/12-60068.pdf" style="font-size: 14px;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">TODD FREALY V. RICK REYNOLDS</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a class="coa_dg_a2" href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/09/12-56506.pdf" style="font-size: 14px;" target="" title="Case Title"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">JOSE SANTOS V. LINDA THOMAS</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Tenth:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px;"><a href="https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-1346.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ellis v. J.R.'s Country Stores</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Eleventh:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201314013.op2.pdf" style="font-size: 12px;" target="_top"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Palm Beach Golf Center-Boca, Inc. v. John G. Sarris, D.D.S., P.A.</span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Federal Circuit:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">\</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; color: black; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1110.Errata.3-9-2015.1.PDF" style="background-image: url(http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/templates/images/icons/icon_pdf.gif); background-position: 0px 3px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; border: 0px; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 5px 0px 5px 20px; text-align: center;">PAPST LICENSING v. FUJIFILM CORPORATION [ERRATA]</a></span><br />
<br />
Summaries TK. Vel non.<br />
<br />
MB<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-12845955505516235782015-03-10T10:55:00.001-04:002015-03-10T10:55:27.752-04:00Seventh Circuit: Official Committee of Unsecure v. Jerome ListeckiCatholic Archdiocesan bankruptcy / RFRA<br />
<br />
RFRA does not apply where the government is not a party to the action, as the statute specifically requires the government to make a showing as to means narrowing.<br />
<br />
Committee of creditors does not act under the color of state law.<br />
<br />
Fact that Archdiocese was haled into court insufficient to establish as color of state law. (Court holds that S1983 standard parallels RFRA.)<br />
<br />
Avoiding pre-petition transfer of funds to cemetery fund is a sufficiently narrowly tailored implementation of a neutral policy of general applicability.<br />
<br />
Failure to recuse was problematic.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D03-09/C:13-2881:J:Williams:aut:T:fnOp:N:1513568:S:0" target="_blank">Official Committee of Unsecure v. Jerome Listecki</a><br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-45541304544760340692015-03-10T10:42:00.002-04:002015-03-10T10:42:31.982-04:00Second Circuit: In re Peter S. GordonImmigration attorney reprimanded & suspended for motions without basis in law, lack of candor to investigating tribunal.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/26f5e812-ec10-4bd6-afc3-819ea6fb9972/1/doc/11-90055.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/26f5e812-ec10-4bd6-afc3-819ea6fb9972/1/hilite/" target="_blank">In re Peter S. Gordon</a></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-30387336418793578062015-03-09T14:38:00.004-04:002015-03-09T14:38:57.653-04:00Coverage Very complex FLSA ruling out of the Tenth today, spotted a mention of FRE/hearsay as well. 11th has one case. Unfortunately, I'm out of time here. Will catch up these two with late-breaking posts from the senior circuits tomorrow. Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-71316833113207829432015-03-09T14:20:00.005-04:002015-03-09T14:20:55.501-04:00Eighth Circuit: Marissa Walz v. Ameriprise Financial, IncIf an employee failed to disclose a non-obvious disability that impaired the performance of the essential functions of his or her job, summary judgement for the employer on the ADA claim is appropriate.<br />
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/142495P.pdf" target="_blank"><b>Marissa Walz</b> v. <b>Ameriprise Financial, Inc</b></a></pre>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4475206498908573451.post-57802461362678918702015-03-09T14:16:00.001-04:002015-03-09T14:16:18.657-04:00Eighth Circuit: Jacqueline Conners v. Gusano's Chicago Style PizzeriDenial of Motion to Compel Arbitration sufficiently final for purposes of appeal.<br />
<br />
Absent showing that new arbitration agreement chilled potential challenges to the employer, past employees not covered by the agreement who are currently litigating against the employer have no standing to challenge it on behalf of putative co-plaintiffs.<br />
<br />
<br />
<pre style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px; line-height: 15px;"><a href="http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/141829P.pdf" target="_blank"><b>Jacqueline Conners</b> v. <b>Gusano's Chicago Style Pizzeria</b></a></pre>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com