Short Form -- 6/19 - 6/21

First:

 Evergreen Partnering Group v. Pactiv Corporation 

Second:

Grullon v. City of New Haven
Jones v. Smith
United States v. Bonventre
United States v. Shellef
Cruz v. FXDirectDealer, LLC
Spavone v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Corr. Servs.
Chhabra v. USA
In re: Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities
United States v. Turner
Vidro v. United States

Third:

USA v. Lee Graves
Gwynn v. City of Philadelphia

Fourth:

US v. Thomas Hager 
Jennifer Clodfelter v. Republic of Sudan
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Avery Cashion, III 
US v. Okechukwo Otuya
US v. Mitchell Smalls 

Rest TK. Perhaps. Time is short.

MB

Short Form - Rest of Tuesday

Fifth:

Florentino Meza v. Intelligent Mexican Marketing,

Seventh:

USA v.   Robert Loffredi
Robert Yeftich v.   Navistar, Inc.

Eighth (From site):

121797P.pdf   06/18/2013  Donna Floyd-Gimon  v.  University of Arkansas
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-1797
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock    
  [PUBLISHED] [Chief Judge Riley, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, 
  Circuit Judges]
  Civil Case - civil rights. District court's grant of 
  summary judgment in civil rights action alleging violations of due process 
  and equal protection relating to termination for gross misconduct is 
  affirmed. Due process claims failed because employee received all the 
  process she was due; the failure to provide specific examples of altered 
  records does not rise to the level of a due process violation. Claim that 
  employee was deprived of a liberty interest in her reputation without due 
  process failed because employee did not sufficiently, if at all, request a 
  name-clearing hearing. District court did not err in finding employee 
  failed to show direct evidence of gender discrimination and correctly 
  concluded employee did not show the defendants' explanation for terminating 
  her was a pretext for gender discrimination; the comparators were not 
  similarly situated. 
 
122654P.pdf   06/18/2013  Jenny Evance  v.  Trumann Health Services
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2654
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Jonesboro    
  [PUBLISHED] [Chief Judge Riley, Author, with Bright and Benton, Circuit Judges]
  Civil Case - employment discrimination. Appeal is limited 
  to review of summary judgment as that was only order designated in the 
  notice of appeal. District court correctly granted summary judgment on 
  discrimination claims, as there was no direct evidence of discrimination 
  and employer articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for 
  termination and Evance did not show other similarly situated employees were 
  treated more favorably. District court properly granted summary judgment on 
  defamation claims, as there was no evidence to support she was defamed by 
  falsely stating she initiated improper conduct with resident. 
 
123766P.pdf   06/18/2013  William Dimercurio  v.  Deidre Malcom
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-3766
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
  [PUBLISHED] [Arnold, Author, with Gruender and Benton, Circuit Judges]
  Civil Case - Rule 41(b) dismissals. After district court 
  rescheduled trial, denied plaintiff's motion for continuance of retrial 
  date, and denied motion for reconsideration, the district court dismissed 
  the case with prejudice for failure to prosecute the appeal on the trial 
  date. District court abused its discretion in denying the continuance and 
  erred in dismissing the case with prejudice. The dismissal with prejudice 
  is reversed and the case remanded. 
 

Ninth:

USA V. MARK AVERY
12-35209
Anchorage District Court
Habeas
06/18/2013
PEDRO TAMAYO-TAMAYO V. ERIC H. HOLDER JR.
08-74005
Board of Immigration Appeals
Agency
06/18/2013
ANGEL LOPEZ-VALENZUELA V. COUNTY OF MARICOPA
11-16487
Phoenix District Court
Habeas
06/18/2013
USA V. VICTOR GONZALEZ VAZQUEZ
11-30176
Seattle District Court
Criminal
06/18/2013

DC:

11-5344Abdul Al Qader Hussain v. Barack Obama

 06/18/2013

11-5353In Re: Polar Bear Endangered Species Act Listing

 06/18/2013

12-5032Jefferson Morley v. CIA

 06/18/2013

12-5294Delta Airlines v. Export-Import Bank of the US

Federal Circuit:

NOVO NORDISK A/S v. CARACO PHARMACEUTICAL [OPINION]

LEVI STRAUSS & CO. v. ABERCROMBIE & FITCH [OPINION]

Second Circuit: Castillo Grand, LLC v. Sheraton Operating Corporation

Federal statute does not provide for the award of fees where the action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Insufficient bad faith in juggling of plaintiffs to justify award of fees under common-law principles.

Castillo Grand, LLC v. Sheraton Operating Corporation

Second Circuit: Cappiello v. ICD Publ’ns, Inc.

In a diversity action, federal rules - not state laws - control the level of post-judgment interest due.  (Where constitutional.)

Cappiello v. ICD Publ’ns, Inc.

Short Form: Monday

(Plus a couple from the DC Circuit late Friday.)

First Circuit:

US v. Van Bommel Duyzing  -- As the entire amount seized was in the caption of the warrant, omission of part of the sum from the details doesn't bar proper service.  Plaintiff didn't have sufficient ownership for standing to challenge the seizure of the bales of cash thrown off the boat.  Concur/Dissent: There was insufficient ownership to establish standing to challenge seizure of the cash found on the deft's person.
Joyce v. Town of Dennis, MA  -- Gender discrimination - No error in denial of punitive damages instruction; Court did not sufficiently weigh potential for future harm before denying injunctive relief; Reduction of fees was error.
US v. Ihenacho -- Fraud/ sentencing

Sixth Circuit:

James Daley, Jr. v. Ann Mostoller  -- Boilerplate agreement to lien on IRA did not vitiate bankruptcy protection for the IRA.

Seventh Circuit:

USA v.   Parnell Gulley -- FRE: Insufficient contemporaneous objection, so plain error review; Evidence as to prior bad acts went to impeachment; sentencing challenges.
Paul Villanueva v.   Keith Anglin -- Prisoner challenge to mandatory supervised release as a violation of the terms of the plea bargain; Untimely under AEDPA, as the clock ran from the mention of it in the plea colloquoy; Deft has the burden to establish that he/she thought that the prison term did not include suupervised release.

Eighth Circuit (From site):

122274P.pdf   06/10/2013  United States  v.  Shawn Mackey
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2274
   U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Rapid City    
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Bright and Loken, Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court did not err in applying
   the criteria set forth in Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003) when it
   granted the government's motion to medicate defendant involuntarily to
   restore his competency to stand trial.

126070P.pdf   06/10/2013  Felicia McIntosh  v.  John LaBarge, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-6070
   U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Saladino, Author, with Kressel and Shodeen,
   Bankruptcy Judges]
   Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Order confirming debtor's Chapter 13
   plan over her objection is affirmed; where debtor concedes that one or
   more of her proposed additions to the plan were appropriately rejected,
   the concession is fatal to her appeal as a court must accept or reject a plan
   as a whole; contrary to debtor's assertions, the model plan form used in
   the Eastern District of Missouri does not infringe upon a debtor's
   substantive rights under the Code.

Ninth Circuit:

USA V. CHARLES GILLENWATER, II -- [Must-read] Deft has a constitutional and statutory right to testify at competency hearing, can only be waived by the deft personally.  If deft becomes disruptive, he must be warned of possibility of exclusion from hearing.  Testimony at comeptency hearing can only be used for impeachment.

Tenth Circuit:

United States v. Dunbar
United States v. Dyke


DC Circuit:


NRG Power Marketing, LLC v. FERC
Suburban Air Freight, Inc. v. TSA

Short-Form (Omnibus, 6/11-6/13)

(As of about 1:30PM ET 6/13.)

First:

Boston Property Exchange Trans v. Iantosca  (Souter) Endorsement of order was not a final judgment; state claims might have been waived when not raised in state action; insufficient causation for tort claims.
United States v. Ortho Biotech Products, LP  -- FRCP - discovery appropriately limited

Second:

Carrion v. Agfa Construction, Inc.  --- Third-party private action to enforce wage scales is foreclosed by precedent; 
Mali v. Federal Insurance Co. -- Court did not have to make specific findings prior to adverse inference instruction on missing photo, as it was circumstantial, not punitive; 
Souratgar v. Fair -- Hague Convention
Gaia House Mezz LLC v. State St. Bank & Trust Co. -- Claims on contract
Marshall v. Randall -- Grand jury testimony can be used to impeach the witness in subsequent S1983 suit; 
Guzzo v. Cristofano -- Hague Convention
CGS Indus., Inc. v. Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co. -- Duty to defend -- "advertising injury"
Hooks v. Forman, Holt, Eliades & Ravin, LLC -- FDCPA - disputing of debt in written form
Gary Friedrich Enters., LLC v. Marvel Characters, Inc. -- Genuine issues of materialfact as to assignment of IP rights.
United States v. Malki  -- Trial court erred in undertaking de novo re-sentencing after remand to correct Guidelines error.

Fourth (6/13 not posted yet):

US v. Abduladhim Al Sabahi  -- Alien was here unlawfully; District court did not have to wait for IJ to rule on removability; sufficient evidence on weapons possession charge despite deft's 911 call (excluded as hearsay)

Fifth:

X Technologies, Inc. v. Marvin Test Systems, Inc. -- Breach of contract claim
USA v. Calvin Windless -- Court cannot rely on bare arrest record when imposing sentence conditions.

Sixth:

Joseph Sadie v. City of Cleveland  -- Age discrimination claim - mandatory police/fire retirement age
USA v. Akeem Stafford -- Crim -- sufficient evidence, gunshot residue evidence properly admitted
Christopher Hrivnak v. NCO Portfolio Management Inc.  -- Class claim not moot after offer of only partial relief to putative representative

Seventh:


USA v.  Funds in the amount of $574,84

Jennifer Hitchcock v. Angel Corps Incorporated

USA v.  Rodney Johnson

USA v. John Natale

Atkinson Candy Company v. Kenray Associates, Incorporate

Tiberius Mays v. Jerome Springborn

USA v. Ladmarald Cates

Deborah Kenseth v. Dean Health Plan, Incorporated (concurrence)

Eighth (From site):

121605P.pdf   06/13/2013  Iowa Right To Life Committee  v.  Megan Tooker
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-1605
  U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines    
  [PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Smith and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case - Campaign Financing. Please see the opinion text for further 
  details of the court's ruling in this challenge to the constitutionality of 
  several Iowa campaign-finance laws, an administrative rule and two related 
  forms. Plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the definitions under Iowa 
  Code subsections 96A.102(18) and 68A.402(9); certain provisions of statutory 
  sections, an Iowa Code Administrative rule and Form Ind-Exp-O are 
  constitutional as applied to plaintiff and groups whose major purpose is not 
  nominating or electing candidates, while other sentences of the statute, 
  rule and Form DR-3 are unconstitutional as applied to plaintiff and such 
  groups; Iowa Code section 68A.503 is constitutional under the First and 
  Fourteenth Amendments; plaintiff has standing to challenge under the First 
  Amendment Iowa Code subsections 68A.404(2)(a-b) and 68.404(5)(g); plaintiff 
  has standing to challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment whether those 
  sections impose content-based restrictions that violate its right to equal 
  protection; Subsections 68A.404(2)(a-b) are constitutional under the Equal 
  Protection Clause insofar as they do not differentiate between similarly 
  situated speakers; the clause "of the corporation" in Iowa Code subsections 
  68A.404(5)(g) and the clause "if the organization making the expenditure is 
  a corporation" in Form Ind-Exp-O are unconstitutional under the Fourteenth 
  Amendment. On remand, the district court should consider severability. Judge 
  Melloy, concurring. 
 
122215P.pdf   06/13/2013  Doe Run Resources Corporation  v.  Lexington Insurance Company
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2215
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
  [PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Murphy and Colloton, Circuit Judges] 
  Civil case - Insurance. In a declaratory judgment action brought to 
  determine whether defendant had an obligation to defend Doe Run on claims 
  that its mining and mill operations had caused environmental damage on 
  neighboring property, the district court did not err in determining the 
  insurer had no duty to defend because the policies' absolute pollution 
  exclusions unambiguously barred coverage of all claims asserted in the suit 
  brought against Doe Run. 
 
122321P.pdf   06/13/2013  United States  v.  Lawrence Johnson
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2321
  U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Waterloo    
  [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Evidence was sufficient to 
  support defendant's conviction for conspiracy to distribute heroin; because 
  the identity of defendant's coconspirators was not an essential element of 
  the conspiracy, the district court's failure to include their names in the 
  jury instruction was not a constructive amendment of the indictment; 
  presentation of evidence that defendant conspired with indicted and 
  unindicted coconspirators was not a constructive amendment of the indictment 
  or a variance; claim that the government charged a single conspiracy and 
  proved multiple conspiracies rejected; rejection of defendant's requests for 
  instructions on single v. multiple conspiracy and buyer-seller relationship 
  was not error; an instruction requiring proof that a detectable (as opposed 
  to measurable) amount of a controlled substance was knowingly and 
  intentionally distributed is sufficient to sustain a conviction under 21 
  U.S.C. Sec. 841(a); while the oral pronouncement of sentence is controlling, 
  when the oral pronouncement does not resolve whether sentences are 
  concurrent or consecutive, the clearly expressed intent of the sentencing 
  judge as set out in the written judgment and commitment may properly serve 
  to resolve the issue. 

122757P.pdf   06/13/2013  Ranna Muor  v.  U.S. Bank National Association
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2757
  U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
  [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Colloton, Circuit Judge, and P.K. 
  Holmes, District Judge]
  Civil case - Employment Discrimination. Assuming 
  that a written warning issued plaintiff was an adverse employment action and 
  that she could otherwise establish a prima facie case of race and national 
  origin discrimination, the employer articulated a legitimate, 
  non-discriminatory basis for issuing the warning, and plaintiff failed to 
  show the stated reason was pretextual; on the claim defendant retaliated 
  against plaintiff for complaining internally about discrimination and for 
  filing a discrimination charge, plaintiff failed to establish a causal 
  connection between her complaints of discrimination and the adverse 
  employment action. 
 
123498P.pdf   06/13/2013  The Doe Run Resources Corp.  v.  Lexington Insurance Company
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-3498
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
  [PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Gruender, Circuit Judge, and Wimes, 
  District Judge]
  Civil case - Insurance. In a declaratory judgment action 
  to determine whether the insurer had a duty to defend Doe Run in two 
  lawsuits seeking damages from operation of Doe Run's waste pile known as the 
  "Leadwood Pile," the district court correctly determined that the insurance 
  policy's pollution exclusions unambiguously applied to claims that Doe Run 
  tortiously released pollutants into the environment and thereby barred a 
  duty to defend in one of the suits; however, the second suit included 
  allegations not found in the other action - that Doe Run distributed the 
  chat and tailings into the community for use on roads and in buildings and 
  children's sandboxes - and these allegations are not based on the 
  inadvertent release of pollutants; this claim, that plaintiffs were injured 
  by distribution of toxic materials, potentially fell within the policies' 
  coverage and created a duty to defend; additionally, the complaint in this 
  action also included claims that Doe Run created an attractive nuisance by 
  leaving the Leadwood Pile open and available to the general public, an 
  allegation which was not unambiguously barred by the pollution exclusions. 

123006P.pdf   06/12/2013  United States  v.  Ardelle Dunlap, Jr.
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-3006
  U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha    
  [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Beam and Melloy,
  Circuit Judges]
  Criminal case - Criminal law. Where defendant had served the
  sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release and faced no
  further supervision, his appeal must be dismissed as moot; neither the
  possibility that the supervised release violation involved in the case might
  increase his sentence for a future conviction nor social stigma associated
  with conviction established a sufficient basis to maintain the appeal; case
  did not fall within the "capable of repetition yet evading review"
  exception to mootness.

122748P.pdf   06/11/2013  United States  v.  Lee Adams
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2748
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock    
  [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Melloy and Smith, Circuit Judges]
  Criminal case - Sentencing. Under California law, defendant's two
  convictions were felonies for sentencing purposes because, although each
  of the assault cases may "wobble" between a felony and a misdemeanor,
  neither conviction resulted in a judgment and neither sentencing court
  declared the convictions to be misdemeanors; the case contained no
  grievous ambiguity or uncertainty, and the rule of lenity did not apply;
  based on this analysis, the district court did not err in classifying
  defendant as an armed career criminal under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924(e).

131196P.pdf   06/11/2013  United States  v.  Dennis Capps
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-1196
  U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau    
  [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and
  Benton, Circuit Judge]
  Criminal case - Criminal law and Sentencing. Failure to give Miranda
  warning prior to asking defendant to consent to a search did not nullify
  defendant's otherwise voluntary consent; search of defendant's vehicle
  did not exceed the scope of defendant's consent; mandatory life sentence
  pursuant to 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(b)(1)(A)(viii) does not violate the Eighth
  Amendment; Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012) does not disturb
  existing circuit precedent foreclosing defendant's argument that his
  sentence is grossly disproportionate.

Ninth:

CONSERVATION CONGRESS V. USFS

DOUG C. V. STATE OF HAWAII, DEPARTMENT OF

FOURTH INVESTMENT LP V. US

USA V. UBALDO GONZALEZ-AGUILAR

Eleventh:

Ronald Palmer Heath v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

USA v. Scott W. Rothstein

Jose Alberto Perez-Guerrero v. U.S. Attorney General

DC:

Kevin West v. John Potter

Catholic Health Initiatives v. Kathleen Sebelius
USA v. Ali Ali
Chlorine Institute, Inc. v. Federal Railroad Admin.
USPS v. PRC
John Saad v. SEC

Federal Circuit:

DARRELL CRAWFORD v. ARMY 
REGINA PIRKL v. SHINSEKI
RACK ROOM SHOES v. US

No posts tomorrow.  Back next week -- with fuller summaries.

-MB

One Day More

Instead of today's planned post listing Tuesday's & Wednesday's opinions, we'll go for the trifecta tomorrow.

MB

Rest of Monday

Third Circuit:

USA v. Albert Savani -- Crack/cocaine resentencing - where original sentence was below mandatory minimums due to substantial assistance departure, no bar to resentencing.

Fourth Circuit:

US v. Ever Medina   -- Diversionary disposition is a valid predicate.
US v. Frank Chatmon -- Medication for competency.

Sixth Circuit:

Peabody Coal Company v. Dir., OWCP   -- Statute of limitations on health claim.  
Bryan Pazdzierz v. First Am. Title Ins. 

Seventh Circuit:

USA v.   Javier Munoz
Jacqueline Johnson v.   Chicago Board of Education

Eighth Circuit (From site):

122274P.pdf  06/10/2013  United States  v.  Shawn Mackey
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:   12-2274
   U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Rapid City   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Bright and Loken, Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court did not err in applying
   the criteria set forth in Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003) when it
   granted the government's motion to medicate defendant involuntarily to
   restore his competency to stand trial.

126070P.pdf  06/10/2013  Felicia McIntosh  v.  John LaBarge, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:   12-6070
   U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Saladino, Author, with Kressel and Shodeen,
   Bankruptcy Judges]
   Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Order confirming debtor's Chapter 13
   plan over her objection is affirmed; where debtor concedes that one or
   more of her proposed additions to the plan were appropriately rejected,
   the concession is fatal to her appeal as a court must accept or reject a plan
   as a whole; contrary to debtor's assertions, the model plan form used in
   the Eastern District of Missouri does not infringe upon a debtor's
   substantive rights under the Code.

Ninth Circuit:

CHRISTOPHER JONES V. E. MCDANIEL
ELISNED CORRO-BARRAGAN V. ERIC H. HOLDER JR.
USA V. JOSE MUNIZ-JAQUEZ

Tenth Circuit:

United States v. Zhou

Eleventh Circuit:

Maria Teresa Davila v. Maria Claudia Menendez, et al

Federal Circuit:

ORGANIC SEED GROWERS AND TRADE v. MONSANTO COMPANY [OPINION]


Tuesday & Wednesday's opinions will be listed on Wednesday afternoon.  


(If the crick don't rise.)


-MB

Second Circuit -- In re Quebecor World (USA), Inc.

To be exempt from avoidance in bankruptcy, a securities-related payment need be either to a financial institution or for the benefit of a financial institution.

In re Quebecor World (USA), Inc.

First Circuit -- Goldstein v. Galvin

An official who litigates a claim in an official capacity is not precluded from relitigating the claim in a personal capacity.

Administrator does not automatically receive absolute immunity when performing adjudicative function.  Elected office no bar to absolute immunity.

Inclusion of plaintiff's name on press release not a basis for a 1A retaliation claim.

Goldstein v. Galvin 

TK

Full rundown of the week posted tomorrow. Must run. 

MB

[Update: Nope - moving on, starting with Monday's decisions.]

Fourth Circuit -- American Petroleum Institute v. Roy Cooper, III

Preemption --

Ability of regulated parties to "opt out" of part of statute does not preclude preemption analysis.

As government encourages ethanol blending, it isn't adulteration and is therefore not preempted by anti-adulteration statute.

Lanham Act preemption a matter for trial.

American Petroleum Institute v. Roy Cooper, III

Third Circuit -- Brittany Morrow v. Barry Balaski

No S1983 remedy for racial harassment by fellow students, as there is an insufficient special relationship / no state-created danger.

Concurrence: Stare decisis / en banc threshold not reached.  ("Sure error")

Concur/Dissent: Special relationship created.

Dissent: Special relationship & state-created danger.

Dissent: Duty of care.

Brittany Morrow v. Barry Balaski

Super-Short Form -- Monday & Tuesday

Just the list.  - MB

First Circuit:

Weiss v. DHL Express, Inc. 
US v. Mahoney 

Second Circuit:

VRG Linhas Aereas S.A. v. MatlinPatterson Global Opportunities Partners II
Ali v. Fed. Ins. Co.
Vincent v. Yelich; Earley v. Annucci

Third Circuit:

Interfaith Comm Orgn v. Honeywell Intl Inc

Fourth Circuit:

Westmoreland Coal Company v. Jarrell Cochran
SG Homes Associates, LP v. Michael Marinucci

Fifth Circuit:

Asbert Joseph v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Seventh Circuit:

USA v.   Javier Zamudio
USA v.   Ricardo Garcia-Segura
USA v.   Jeffrey Weaver
Shu Han Liu v.   Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Anil Goyal v.   Gas Technology Institute

Eighth Circuit (from site):

136012P.pdf   06/04/2013  Laura Mehlhaff  v.  Forrest Allred
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-6012
  U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre    
  [PUBLISHED] [Federman, Author, with Schermer and Shodeen,
  Bankruptcy Judges]
  Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Bankruptcy court did not err in
  determining debtor's prepetition claim against her former spouse for
  alimony was property of the bankruptcy estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec.
  541(a)(1), and the order directing her to turn that claim over to the trustee
  is affirmed.

121383P.pdf   06/03/2013  James Bradshaw  v.  FFE Transportation Services, I
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-1383
                         and No:  12-2161
  U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs    
  [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
  Civil case - Torts. District court did not abuse its discretion by deciding
  defendants had waived their objections to plaintiff's medical witnesses by
  failing to make these objections at the time set in the district court's
  discovery scheduling order; nor did the court err in declining to reopen
  discovery after declaring a mistrial in the first trial; no error, under the
  circumstances of the case, in allowing a doctor to use undisclosed
  anatomical drawings at the second trial as the court properly limited
  testimony on the drawings and gave the jury an instruction that the
  drawings did not amount to substantive evidence; defendants did not
  sufficiently articulate a Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(iii) objection to the drawings.
 
122450P.pdf   06/03/2013  United States  v.  Delmarcus Johnson
  U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-2450
  U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
  [PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Melloy and Benton, Circuit Judges]
  Criminal case - Criminal case. There was a factual basis for defendant's
  guilty plea and no Rule 11(b)(3) error occurred; district court did not
  abuse its discretion by denying defendant's motion to withdraw his plea.

Ninth Circuit:

STEVE HARRIS V. AMGEN, INC.	10-56014	Los Angeles District Court	Civil		06/04/2013
RONALD DEERE V. VINCE CULLEN	10-99013	Los Angeles District Court	Prisoner Death Penalty		06/03/2013
HIGHER TASTE V. CITY OF TACOMA	11-36046	Tacoma District Court	Civil		06/03/2013
USA V. KELECHI AJOKU	11-50230	Los Angeles District Court	Criminal		06/03/2013
USA V. PEDRO CABRERA-GUTIERREZ	12-30233	Spokane District Court	Criminal		06/03/2013
USA V. SHIRLEY MORGAN	12-10056	Tucson District Court	Criminal		06/03/2013

Tenth Circuit:

 11-9524  Lockheed Martin v. DOL
 11-2055  Pahls v. Thomas

Eleventh Circuit:

USA v. Lonnie Whatley

DC Circuit:

10-3010USA v. Ian Watson

12-7064Louis Cannon v. DC

Federal Circuit:

REGENTS OF UNIV. OF MINNESOTA v. AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION [OPINION]

Super-Short Form: Rest of Thursday, all of Friday

Apparently, some Circuits are clearing their desks today, and MB has things to do and promises to keep, so, for the first time ever (if memory serves), just the list.

First Circuit:

In Re: Request from the United v. 
Stor/Gard, Inc. v. Strathmore Ins. Co. 
Heineman-Guta v. Guidant Corporation 
US v. Torres-Pagan 

Second Circuit:

Liberty Synergistics Inc. v. Microflo Ltd.
Terra Firma Investments v. Citigroup
State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition v. Rowland
United States v. Defreitas
Kelly-Brown, et al. v. Winfrey, et al.

Third Circuit:

In re: Asbestos Prod Liability v.
MD Mall Associates v. CSX Trans Inc

Fourth Circuit:

The North Carolina State Board v. FTC
Stephanie Crockett v. Mission Hospital, Inc. 

Fifth Circuit:

EEOC v. Houston Funding II, Limited, et al
Rachel Juino v. Livingston Prsh Fire District
Reynaldo Ramirez v. Jim Wells County, Texas

Sixth Circuit:

Sharon Hall v. Lynne Callahan 
Donna Manwaring v. Erick Martinez 
USA v. Carolyn Moore 
USA v. Daryl Foster 
Burenjargal Dugarsuren v. Eric Holder, Jr. 
Omar Ide Abdou v. Eric Holder, Jr. 

Seventh Circuit:

Valentin Bitsin v.   Eric Holder, Jr.
Sams Hotel Group, LLC v.   Environs, Inc.

Eighth Circuit:

122514P.pdf  05/31/2013  Moussa Diallo  v.  Eric H. Holder, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:   12-2514
   Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals   
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Loken,
   Circuit Judge]
   Petition for Review - Immigration. The court lacks jurisdiction to
   review discretionary denials of adjustment of status, and the petition
   for review is denied.

Ninth Circuit:

ASIL MASHIRI V. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

JESSE ENGEBRETSON V. MIKE MAHONEY

CLASSIC CONCEPTS V. LINEN SOURCE, INC.

RAMON MACIAS-CARREON V. ERIC HOLDER, JR.

USA V. JOHN MALONEY

RONALD FOURNIER V. KATHLEEN SEBELIUS

TIMOTHY GANTT V. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

(There might have been something published in the Tenth yesterday.)

Eleventh Circuit:

William Reaves v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

DC Circuit:

Natl Shooting Sports Found. v. B. Todd Jones

Wendy Wagner v. Federal Election Commission

Summaries TK.  Outside chance.

- MB