/usr/local/projects/usca/indexes/USCA-ALL.index Search the Opinions of the US Circuit Courts
skip navigation


Search the opinions of the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

Search for:
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"
This collection has many hidden limitations. To find out what you're really searching, see the disclaimer .

Your query food stamp returned 229 results.

Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to consider using additional terms to narrow it.

1000 OPINION/ORDER
A jury found Anwar Haddad was guilty of one count of wire fraud and two counts of money laundering. Was authorized to sell certain approved food items for food stamps. Haddad was sentenced to concurrent terms of 51 months' imprisonment on all three counts and two years of supervised release. He further contends that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1957. R&F was an authorized vendor to sell food to recipients of food stamp benefits. Food stamp benefits are distributed to low income families to help them buy certain staple food items. In recent years the benefits have been provided through an electronic transfer card (known as a LINK card in Illinois) that operates like a debit card. Point of sale machines that deduct money from the LINK card when food is purchased. Once the recipient's identity is confirmed by entering his or her unique PIN number. The food stamp sales are totaled up in the machine at the end of each day. No. 05 3086 3 The application process for the Food Stamp Program is fairly rigorous.
992 OPINION/ORDER
The government determined that Alhalabi was illegally paying his customers cash for their benefits in an amount well below their face value. He was sentenced to fortyone months' imprisonment. During which they learn that they are forbidden from trading food stamps for cash. The application further stated that the store was stocked with household supplies and a range of foods including breads. He estimated that Holyland would have annual gross sales of $240. Holyland was reauthorized in December 1996. Replacing the existing regime in which paper food stamp coupons were used to obtain food. Illinois adopted an electronic system in which each person eligible for food stamp benefits had an individual account to which benefits were added once a month. Which was named the LINK system. Which was swiped at a point of sale device (the
973 OPINION/ORDER
Inc. was on brief for appellants. Were on brief for appellee. Because we conclude that the energy related components of HUD and FmHA utility reimbursements are excluded by statute from income under the Food Stamp Act. BACKGROUND BACKGROUND The defendant appellees are the Secretary of USDA (Secretary) and the Commissioner of the Maine Department of Human Services. Plaintiffs are a class of tenants receiving food stamps. In privately owned FmHA assisted housing.1 1The class includes [a]ll the persons in the State of Maine who will receive or who have received FmHA and/or HUD utility [reimbursements] anytime since March 1. 1990 and whose food stamp benefits were or will be 2 Plaintiffs.
922 OPINION/ORDER
Idias owns and operates a grocery store that was disqualified from the federal Food Stamp Program by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the United States Department of Agriculture. Idias was at a loss to explain these discrepancies to the district court. The FNS notified Idias that he was being charged with food stamp trafficking. Which is
920 OPINION/ORDER
The federal Food Stamp Act prohibited a state from collecting a food stamp overissuance that was due to its own administrative error (
893 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a judgment of civil forfeiture for funds from a bank account owned by Kim's Wholesale Distributors. The complaint claimed that the funds were subject to forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. Proof supporting the forfeiture was obtained from business records seized from Kim's pursuant to a warrant issued by a United States Magistrate Judge in connection with a wide scale investigation of illegal trafficking in food stamps. Final judgment was entered against Kim's in the amount of $92. Chinese take out restaurants were buying food stamps from low income food stamp recipients for seventy cents on the dollar. It was alleged that the restaurants were then reselling the food stamps to a partnership (the
821 OPINION/ORDER
The court is required to impose a consecutive sentence of imprisonment under both of these provisions. If the court determined that a
816 OPINION/ORDER
I. Leonard Traficanti is the owner and operator of LT's Gas/Snaks. The Department of Agriculture launched an undercover operation to determine whether either the owner or the employees of LT's were trafficking in food stamps. White was upset with Traficanti because he made her take a polygraph test to determine if she was stealing from the store. White bought food stamps illegally in order
809 OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief for appellant. Victoria Pulos with whom Deborah Schachter and New Hampshire Legal Assistance were on brief for appellees. This is a class action challenging as arbitrary and capricious an Aid to Families With Dependent Children (
797 OPINION/ORDER
Was on brief. Covington & Burling were on brief. Were on brief. We treat the appeal as if the appellees were a single entity. 2 No. 88 525. Although the coupons were actually disbursed by the participating states. Because overpayments were charged to the federal tab. The federal government 3 imposed a monetary sanction.2 Such fines were calculated by multiplying the total dollar value of state issued food stamps for the fiscal year times the difference between the state's EER and its TER. The state's EER was below five percent. Massachusetts makes four principal claims: (1) that the quality control provisions on which the sanction rested were no longer in effect when FNS imposed the sanction. (2) that FNS's sampling methodology was so biased as to offend the Food Stamp Act. Massachusetts contends that this legislative legerdemain undermined FNS's authority thereafter to impose sanctions for FY 1982.3 It is a hoary rule of the common law that the repeal of a statute eliminates any inchoate liability for penalties under the repealed statute.
795 OPINION/ORDER
This is known as
790 OPINION/ORDER
Griffin was indicted for the unauthorized transfer of food stamps in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 2024(b). It is undisputed that Griffin was not authorized by USDA to accept food stamps and redeem them with Jacque's Meats. His defense was that Murphy was his employer. Griffin's testimony that he believed he was Murphy's employee was insufficient to prove an employment relationship. Out of court declarations that he was her employee. Testimony that Griffin displayed a business license and sold meat to Murphy would not have proved he was her employee and was not otherwise relevant to whether he knowingly engaged in unauthorized food stamp transfers. Testimony that Murphy sold meat to others was collateral impeachment. That is. This issue was not raised in the district court so we review the instruction. If the variance is so fundamental that it permits the jury to convict the defendant of a different crime than that charged. It is a constructive amendment of the indictment that destroy[s] the defendant's substantial right to be tried only on charges presented in an indictment returned by a grand jury.
780 OPINION/ORDER
Bliek and Eberline were issued more food stamps than they were entitled to receive under the Act. discovering this
773 OPINION/ORDER
I. Background Estremera was the owner. FNS sent Estremera a letter notifying her that there was evidence that the store violated Food Stamp Program regulations by exchanging food stamp benefits for cash and ineligible items. FNS notified Estremera by letter that she was immediately and permanently disqualified from accepting food stamps at the store. Estremera may have sold the store to Sousa Investment. DeSousa of Sousa Investment informed FNS that Estremera does not have a financial interest in the store. She was required to pay $66. The penalty was based on six counts of food stamp fraud. That the agency's imposition of the civil penalty was arbitrary and capricious. We are not persuaded by these arguments. Summary judgment was inappropriate in this case because substantial facts remain in dispute regarding whether Estremera actually sold the store to Sousa Investment. The sale was never completed. Estremera also argues that the sale was a
759 OPINION/ORDER
Testified that the store was well known in the community as a place at which one could readily sell food stamps. The defendants are hereafter referred to by their first names. Testified that she visited the Van Buren Market on three occasions and each time she was able to purchase ineligible items with food stamps and/or sell food stamps for cash. The redemption certificates were primarily signed by Raed. He denied depositing food stamps in the bank knowing that they were illegally obtained. He never did so knowing the food stamps were obtained illegally. Perjury is the sort of conduct that may warrant an obstruction of justice enhancement. Perjury is defined as giving false testimony under oath
756 TRM, INC. V. UNITED STATES

This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > TRM. Except when cash is returned as change in a transaction in which coupons were accepted in payment for eligible food.... This is known as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="756"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may95/94-6684.opa.html">TRM, INC. V. UNITED STATES<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>TRM. Except when cash is returned as change in a transaction in which coupons were accepted in payment for eligible food.... This is known as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="730"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1783.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Pine Tree Legal Assistance were on brief. Participating retailers accept the stamps as if they were cash. The Secretary of Agriculture is charged with overseeing the federal aspects of the food stamp program. Income was not to include the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="713"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0227n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A bench trial was conducted. Krause testified that Check Mart was permanently disqualified from the program as a result of an investigation. Which was carried out by the USDA Office of Inspector General and the Akron Police Department. That determined that food stamp benefits were being redeemed for cash and non food items at Check Mart. Krause also testified that the store was disqualified based on an analysis of the store's electronic benefit transfer ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="708"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=03-3848_032.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Where he is serving a fifty one month sentence. The food stamp program no doubt generated business volume that Shady Food may not have otherwise had. That increase was apparently not enough. Alburay made these unlawful exchanges worth his while by paying less than the 1 Traditional food stamp coupons have been replaced by </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="689"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar99/97-5812.man.html">RODRIGUEZ V. UNITED STATES (3/15/1999, NO. 97-5812)<BR></A><BR> Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. THE WELFARE REFORM ACT'S PROVISIONS AFFECTING THE ELIGIBILITY OF ALIENS</CENTER> FOR SSI AND FOOD STAMP WELFARE BENEFITS</P> <P> The federal government provides SSI benefits to impoverished individuals who are elderly. Aliens were eligible for both SSI and food stamp benefits on the same basis as citizens. The Act provides that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="689"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar99/97-5812.man.html">RODRIGUEZ V. UNITED STATES (3/15/1999, NO. 97-5812)<BR></A><BR> Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. THE WELFARE REFORM ACT'S PROVISIONS AFFECTING THE ELIGIBILITY OF ALIENS</CENTER> FOR SSI AND FOOD STAMP WELFARE BENEFITS</P> <P> The federal government provides SSI benefits to impoverished individuals who are elderly. Aliens were eligible for both SSI and food stamp benefits on the same basis as citizens. The Act provides that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="684"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19975812.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. Because no members of the plaintiff class are illegal aliens. We will for convenience use the term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="684"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-5013a.html">STATE OF ARIZONA, ET AL V. TOMMY THOMPSON<BR></A><BR> Ar gued the cause for appellees.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="684"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19975812.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. Because no members of the plaintiff class are illegal aliens. We will for convenience use the term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="669"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200203/01-5013a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief was Scott R. We conclude that HHS erroneously determined that it was without discretion to permit those expenditures. Which was an individual entitlement program. The amount of a state's TANF grant is based on the amount of the reim bursement paid to the state under AFDC during an historical base period. A state may spend its grant </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="667"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb2001/991702.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He argues that his guilty plea was not knowing. We conclude that his plea was knowing. We conclude that the district court did err in not considering Mustafa's ability to pay the restitution that was imposed in the amount of $732. We will remand for resentencing proceedings consistent with this opinion. Each redemption certificate purported to verify that the food stamps Mustafa was depositing were obtained in a manner that was consistent with controlling USDA r egulations. The government also intr oduced the testimony of an employee who testified that Mustafa had attempted to persuade him to say that the fir e was caused by a pot of potatoes left on the stove. Testimony of witnesses regarding the food stamp fraud Mustafa was conducting fr om the 1. The supermarket was in serious financial trouble. Some of the income Mustafa was deriving from the supermarket was derived from a fraudulent food stamp scheme. Mustafa's only viable asset was the insurance policy on the building and the super market business. 3 supermarket. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="655"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0921n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is a case under the Food Stamp Act. I. McClain's is a family owned and operated business that was licensed to participate in the Food Stamp Program in 1997. McClain's is owned by Pamela Hubbard (Hubbard). FNS Program Specialist Mary Graf (Specialist Graf) received a referral that McClain's was paying cash to customers for food stamp benefits. Concluded that there were suspect food stamp redemptions occurring at McClain's. There was significant unusual EBT activity at McClain's. Specialist Graf visited McClain's to determine if the store's inventory and physical layout was capable of supporting the amount and type of sales reflected in the EBT data. She observed that the store was small with only two short aisles not capable of accommodating shopping carts. There were nineteen (19) instances of large withdrawals by two or more households within an unusually short time.1 Second. There were seventy five (75) instances of multiple large withdrawals by single households within an unusually short period of time.2 Third. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="624"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/984637.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appellants) were convicted by a jury of committing various federal crimes arising out of a criminal enterprise of which Appellants were alleged to be members.1 Appellants jointly and individually assert a number of different grounds for reversal on appeal. That the evidence presented by the Government was insufficient for the jury to find Joseph. That the evidence was insufficient to find Joseph. That the evidence was insufficient for the jury to find Joseph guilty of two predicate acts of 1 For the sake of brevity and convenience. All subsequent references to individual Appellants who are Abeds will use their first name. 3 racketeering. That the evidence was insufficient for the jury to find Tawalbeh. Appellants were members of an organization loosely termed the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="604"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/09/021742U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Gettler was charged with food stamp fraud in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 2024(b) (2000). Gettler contends her conviction was not supported by sufficient evidence because no reasonable jury could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Gettler knew she was providing false statements about her income on the food stamp applications and intended to do so. Because Gettler holds a bachelors degree in business and performed a variety of bookkeeping tasks for the family businesses while she was receiving food stamp assistance. We conclude a reasonable jury could have found sufficient evidence to convict Gettler of food stamp fraud. Gettler claims the district court committed error when it refused to give a proposed jury instruction that would have required the government to prove Gettler acted with specific intent to defraud the government. Element two of jury instruction 18 required the jury to find </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="602"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/95/12/952379U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The government presented evidence that Tyler was the operator of P & T's Market and handled its finances. 782.42 was attributable to items eligible for food stamps. United States He asks that this court </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="592"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200310725.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendants herein proceeded to trial and were found guilty. I. This trial clearly demonstrates the inherent danger in a multi defendant conspiracy prosecution ­ that individuals who are not actually members of the group will be swept into the conspiratorial net. Because the government is permitted broad prosecutorial discretion to prove the conspiracy. The likelihood exists that those who associate with conspirators will be found guilty of a crime that they have not intended to commit. This danger is compounded when the grand jury indicts on one theory of the illegal conduct. We have seen such conspiracy prosecutions before. The district court was persuaded to permit the government to proceed upon the assumption that the controlling law of mail fraud would change prior to the end of trial. Was both irrelevant and highly prejudicial. We held that fundamental due process was denied the defendants and vacated their convictions. In violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.1 The defendants were alleged to have used the United States mails in furtherance of a scheme and artifice to defraud McDonald's Corporation (McDonald's). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="585"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971558.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Ibay asserts the court erred by finding it failed to produce sufficient evidence to establish that it was entitled to a civil penalty in lieu of disqualification from participation in the food stamp program and by not conducting a de novo trial on the merits. Ibay's permanent disqualification was affirmed. The court found the evidence insufficient to withstand summary judgment. 2 Summary judgment is appropriate when there is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0198p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was proper. The Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service conducted an undercover investigation of Michigan Express to ensure it was complying with food stamp laws and regulations. Abdallah that Michigan Express was disqualified from participating in the food stamp program. Ajami faced civil penalty if Michigan Express was sold or otherwise transferred. This office has determined that it will not pursue a False Claims Act action or other federal action against you for alleged food stamp trafficking at Michigan Express. Which read s: In the event any retail food store or wholesale food concern which has been disqualified is sold or the ownership thereof is otherwise transferred to a purchaser or transferee. We will affirm if a party fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an essential element on which it would bear the burden at trial. If a party claims the government is estopped from making an argument. Summary judgment is appropriate in favor of the government if there is an insufficient showing for any of the estoppel elements. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1435.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Inc. were on brief. Were on brief. Because Chevron is still the law of the land. The Act is designed </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="539"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0139p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is a consolidated appeal. Challenging the TennCare program's handling of their applications for coverage under the program when Plaintiffs were denied coverage. Plaintiffs Ooten and Hyslope requested and were granted permission to intervene in the action in 1998 and 2000. The TennCare program is a federal waiver plan under the Medicaid Act approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under 42 U.S.C. § 1315. TennCare coverage is extended to three groups of individuals: (1) existing Medicaid beneficiaries and those who meet Medicaid's financial and/or medical eligibility requirements. 1993 . . . did not have coverage under an individual health insurance policy or who did not have (either directly or through a family member) coverage under. The TennCare regulations define uninsurable persons as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200116723ord.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BY THE COURT: The Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Circuit Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor of it (Rule 35. The Petition for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED. /s/ J L EDMONDSON Chief Judge 2 BIRCH. Specially Concurring in the Denial of Rehearing En Banc: The dissents to the denial of rehearing en banc both agree that the Equal Protection Clause challenge to the Florida statute at issue should have been embraced by our court. 4 the vociferous dissent by my sister jurist (for whom I have great respect and affection). The Florida adoption statute at issue is constitutionally flawed. The Lofton panel's analysis and approach in this case was premised on a fundamental principal or philosophy. When he observed: Courts are not representative bodies. They are not designed to be a good reflex of a democratic society. ... Their essential quality is detachment. History teaches that the independence of the judiciary is jeopardized when courts become embroiled in the passions of the day and assume primary responsibility in choosing between competing political. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19948097.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND is constitutional. Plaintiff appellant Brenda Parks is a Sergeant in the Special Investigative Unit of the Warner Robins Police Department. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974828.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in conjunction with the United States Secret Service (USSS) began an investigation into Dobbs Market after receiving information that it was engaged in food stamp fraud. Several undercover sales were conducted over the course of several months beginning in June 1993. No food was purchased during these transactions. The USDA prepared a written report on the results of the investigation which was sent to the United States Attorney's office in Columbia. Search warrants were served on Dobbs Market. 163.33 was traceable to fraudulent food stamp and EBT transactions. When the first undercover sale was made. The amount of the loss was higher than it would have been had the Government decided to prosecute earlier. Music contends that her base offense level was increased because the Government failed to prosecute the case in December 1994 when it had sufficient information to do so. Music's contention is essentially a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/053387np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ignacia Veras de los Santos was convicted by a jury of conspiracy. Claiming that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions. That her trial should have been severed from those of her codefendants. We will affirm. Was manifested in two distinct schemes. She was held criminally responsible for both. 2 1. Veras referred is an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/02/961448P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Concluding that the formula used to determine this monetary penalty is arbitrary and capricious. The legislative history clarified that innocent store owners are liable. Including store personnel and owners that are culpable or negligent with respect to trafficking offenses. . . . We can be assured that the punishment will more closely fit the crime. It is undisputed that Corder timely requested and met the criteria for the alternative monetary sanction. She submitted substantial evidence that she was neither aware of nor benefitted from the violations. Concluding that the penalty was computed in accordance with the formula for first offenders set forth in 7 C.F.R. § 278.6(j)(1) (3). 000 penalty at issue is a quasi criminal sanction. The penalty is Congress has specified the factors that are relevant in imposing criminal fines. The burden a fine will impose on defendant and any dependents. Who was not sanctioned. Congress generally directed FCS to exercise discretion so that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/064580np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. I. The parties are familiar with the facts and proceedings. So we will only briefly revisit them here. The Appellant 2 We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)(1). Our review of the factual findings supporting a district court's application of the Guidelines is only for clear error. A two level sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 is appropriate where the court finds that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="491"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-2203.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Circuit Judge. unsettled question: is the government a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="481"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan95/94-8097.html">PARKS V. CITY OF WARNER ROBINS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Parks v. The district court held that the anti nepotism policy is constitutional. BACKGROUND<p> <p> Plaintiff appellant Brenda Parks is a Sergeant in the Special Investigative Unit of the Warner Robins Police Department. Anti nepotism.<p> <p> (a) <i>Definitions.</i> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="481"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan95/94-8097.html">PARKS V. CITY OF WARNER ROBINS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Parks v. The district court held that the anti nepotism policy is constitutional. BACKGROUND<p> <p> Plaintiff appellant Brenda Parks is a Sergeant in the Special Investigative Unit of the Warner Robins Police Department. Anti nepotism.<p> <p> (a) <i>Definitions.</i> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="460"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar2001/97-2618.ma2.html">UNITED STATES V. SIGMA INT'L (3/15/2001, NO. 97-2618)<BR></A><BR> Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="460"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2001/97-2618.ma2.html">UNITED STATES V. SIGMA INT'L (3/15/2001, NO. 97-2618)<BR></A><BR> Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="455"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/05/952891P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Nebraska (Local Office). 1988 in the district FAIR was denied access to the Local Office. Concluding that FAIR's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were not violated because: (1) the Local Office's policy was not vague. (2) the Local Office was not a public forum. (3) the Local Office's regulation of expressive conduct was reasonable. (4) the Local Office's prohibition on FAIR's efforts to advocate its position to a captive audience was not motivated by opposition to its viewpoint. The requirement of independent appellate review is a rule of federal constitutional law. We are obliged to make a fresh examination of crucial facts. This Court's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="443"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/004330.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arguing that the evidence was insufficient to establish that he had committed that crime or. We will affirm his conviction and sentence in all respects. All ten of the stolen checks were made payable to Pierce or Oloro in amounts varying between $5. A counterfeit commercial check drawn against a law firm's account at a New York City bank was mailed to one of the banks for deposit. The bank never credited the account for the proceeds of the check because it was suspicious of the transaction. Postal inspectors determined that Omoruyi was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="431"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19972618.MA2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="431"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19972618.OP2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="431"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/984136.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dike challenges his conviction asserting that: (1) a motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. (2) exculpatory evidence was improperly excluded. Dike was a clerk at the store. The store was equipped with a point of sale terminal that could electronically access a food stamp recipient's account and transfer funds to the store. The sale amount is entered and funds are transferred to the store. A receipt is printed which contains the statement: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="428"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/08/03-3287.htm">03-3287 -- U.S. V. WESTOVER -- 08/11/2004<BR></A><BR> District Judge.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="428"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/03-1323a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Andrew M. With him on the brief 2 were Arthur F. With him on the brief was Ira J. When it was notified of the election petition. It will be very difficult. (3) creating the impression among employees that their union activities were under surveillance. That they would lose benefits if the Union were elected. The Board's findings of fact are conclusive </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="426"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may95/94-6684.opa_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="426"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may95/94-6684.opa_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="424"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/984557.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> No. 98 4557 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. OPINION PER CURIAM: Meliane Montague was indicted. Montague was convicted on all four counts and sentenced to concurrent terms of twenty four months imprisonment for each count. Montague and Peterson were employees of the United States Postal Service (USPS) at the Brentwood Station Post Office in Raleigh. Montague was the station manager. Peterson was a window clerk. One of Peterson's duties was to sell stamps to the public. This prosecution arose from the process by which these sales were audited. They were recorded on a USPS Form 17. Each clerk was then held responsible for the stamps issued to him or her. Audits were conducted periodically to ensure that the clerks' stamp sales and stamp stock balanced out. Both the clerk and a supervisor were required to count the stamps one by one. Then they would conduct additional counts until they agreed on the contents of the stamp stock. 2 The investigation in this case was precipitated by a burglary at the Brentwood Station Post Office on September 12. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/September2004/032920p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The District Court granted PPG's motion for summary judgment on the ground that there was insufficient proof of an agreement. We will reverse in part. Will & Emery 50 Rockefeller Plaza New York. Will & Emery 18191 Von Karman Avenue Irvine. Molten glass is poured over a bath of higher density liquid. It is polished under controlled temperatures. The glass is fed into an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/032920p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The District Court granted PPG's motion for summary judgment on the ground that there was insufficient proof of an agreement. We will reverse in part. Will & Emery 50 Rockefeller Plaza New York. Will & Emery 18191 Von Karman Avenue Irvine. Molten glass is poured over a bath of higher density liquid. It is polished under controlled temperatures. The glass is fed into an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-5099.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief were Peter D. Pullum (collectively </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-3676.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the IJ's adverse credibility determinations were not based on substantial evidence and because the IJ gave undue weight to Uwase's alleged lack of corroborating evidence. Was fourteen years old when the former Rwandan president died in an April 1994 plane crash. Uwase and her brothers and sisters were of mixed ethnicity. When the violence broke out and they learned they were targeted for extermination. Uwase's parents heard on the radio that the war was over and that it was safe for people to return to their homes. Were too frightened to go back. The sisters were separated. Was ultimately herded back to Kigali when her camp was attacked by RPF soldiers in October 1996. There they interrogated her due to her No. 02 3676 3 mixed ethnicity and because she was found in a Hutu refugee camp. As they had discovered she was part Hutu. The soldiers took her identification papers because if she was found without them. Uwase was reunited with her older sister. Except that Frida told them their father was killed in prison. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200210218.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We must determine whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is violated when a code enforcement officer condemns an apartment complex and evicts the tenants without providing the tenants with contemporaneous notice of their right to appeal the condemnation decision. We must then determine whether the tenants' right to contemporaneous notice was established with such clarity at the time of eviction in this case that the chief of the City of Orlando's Code Enforcement Bureau is not entitled to qualified immunity. Threatened to declare the building unfit for human occupancy if the Our recitation of the facts is based primarily on the admitted facts contained in the parties' joint pretrial statement. To the extent that material facts are in dispute. As we must when the issue of qualified immunity is raised in a summary judgment motion. 92526 n.3 (11th Cir. 2000). 2 1 violations were not corrected.2 The owner was informed that the City of Orlando Code Enforcement Board ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-2090.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Lurie & Krupp LLP was on brief. Was on brief. The United States Department of the Interior is charged with administering the MBTA. This case pirouettes around a provision of the MBTA which 1The MBTA also is in service to other treaty obligations. It is unlawful for a taxidermist to receive money or compensation in exchange for a migratory bird other than from a person who originally provided the bird and requested the taxidermy services. Pitrone is a taxidermist by trade and a huntsman by choice. Pitrone immediately inquired whether Giglio was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1241a.html">DOUGLAS FOODS CORP V. NLRB<BR></A><BR> Argued the cause for respondent.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974521.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> No. 97 4521 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Cobb Leonard was a window clerk at the Enfield. Cobb Leonard was assigned a cash drawer. She was required to place her cash drawer in a locked safe or lock the drawer when she left the post office at the end of the work day or whenever she stepped away from her window at the counter. Did an accountability check on Cobb Leonard's drawer to determine whether the amount of stock and cash in her drawer balanced the amount the records reflected she should have at that time. They determined that there was a shortage in the drawer of $1665.44. Cobb Leonard requested and was provided the opportunity to count the contents of her drawer. Postal records also revealed that in late 1994 there were discrepancies in records relating to money orders Cobb Leonard had sold. That corresponded to money orders for which the records were inconsistent. Two of the three vouchers were partially printed in ink where the images should have been carbonized. The amounts imprinted on the original money orders were $500. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="390"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/982044.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> HARDEE'S FOOD SYSTEMS Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. While a Hardee's employee was passing a cup of coffee to Brenda Garlinger. The Garlingers brought suit against Hardee's in West Virginia state court claiming that the Hardee's employee was negligent in causing the coffee to spill and that Hardee's was strictly liable because its coffee contained a design defect. Namely that it was served at an unreasonable and dangerously hot temperature. HARDEE'S FOOD SYSTEMS 3 mate conclusion was that Hardee's serving temperature for coffee was unacceptably high for human consumption. Diller stated in his report: In my opinion the risk of thermal burn associated with serving coffee at temperatures in the range of 180o to 190oF is unacceptable. Coffee spilled onto bare skin at that temperature will cause a severe burn nearly instantaneously. Coffee drunk without dilution at that temperature range will cause burns to the mouth. 150oF is a much safer temperature for serving beverages. Leading burn experts have recommended a temperature of 135oF or lower. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="380"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/01/961468U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court determined that as the evidence was equally balanced Haynes had failed to carry this burden. Decisions. we have recognized that section In agreement with the Fifth Circuit. 286 (8th Cir. 1994) The Fifth ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="380"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/95D2E7F6B1AF487588256E5A00707A9F/$file/9917264.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The Appellants are citizens of the Federated States of Micronesia who reside in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="380"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AFD64FE849F9EBF288256A140062A3A7/$file/9917264.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The Appellants are citizens of the Federated States of Micronesia who reside in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="380"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-1241a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were Leonard R. The NLRB's findings in relation to these transactions are inadequate. The accompanying restoration order is beyond the scope of the Board's remedial authority. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="363"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/03/97-3002.htm">97-3002 -- U.S. V. AILSWORTH -- 03/10/1998<BR></A><BR> Ailsworth was indicted in a second superseding indictment on forty two counts relating to the possession and distribution of cocaine base or crack cocaine. Five counts pertaining to Defendant were dismissed and Defendant's six codefendants entered guilty pleas. The jury checked the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="359"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/lognameprint.php">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jerome Wayne Johnson</td> <td align=left valign=top>03 13595 / 03 00036 CR J 25 TEM</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>07 12 2004</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align=left valign=top>In re: Will C. Bowman</td> <td align=left valign=top>02 13050 / 01 01345 CV BU E</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>08 13 2003</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align=left valign=top>In re: Will C. Whose name in this complaint will be Dakota Allen v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="359"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2486.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for respondent.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="359"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/lognameprint2.php">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Whose name in this complaint will be Dakota Allen v. Bowman</td> <td align=left valign=top>02 13050 / 01 01345 CV BU E</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>08 13 2003</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align left valign=top>In re: Will C. Cohen</td> <td align=left valign=top>03 13162 / 02 23079 CV KMM</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>07 08 2004</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align left valign=top>In re: Will C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/964498.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 11 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034184p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The en banc opinion rejecting Fallon's argument was filed February 15. Fallon was convicted by a jury of one count of wire fraud and three counts of mail fraud in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This is an appeal of the District Court's judgment of conviction 2 and sentence entered on October 16. Fallon was the president of Derma Genesis. A company which manufactured and distributed microdermabradors under the name </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/05/97-5175.htm">97-5175 -- WILDER V. OKLAHOMA DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES -- 05/19/1998<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Samuel J. Wilder was notified that his eligibility for food stamps would expire April 30. Seeking to have the federal court order defendant to comply with federal guidelines in evaluating his application for food stamps. Wilder was notified of his right to appeal that decision. <p> The district court dismissed the action both because Mr. Wilder appeals arguing that this ruling was in error. Exhaustion is discretionary. His administrative remedies are ineffective. Wilder should have followed the administrative appellate procedures if he disagreed with defendant's denial of his reapplication for food stamps. Federal courts do not have jurisdiction to review administrative decisions of state agencies. <u>See</u> <u>Bush v. Mo. 1984) (federal court </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/715B65BB8FA243CF88256E5A00707AE6/$file/9910478.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We conclude that jurisdiction is proper. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/88AA07B372BA043688256A9C008153F6/$file/9910478.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2001 is further amended as follows: At slip op. 9185. We conclude that jurisdiction is proper. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0D8401227A57A1DC88256A2D005AF070/$file/9910478.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We conclude that jurisdiction is proper. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/07/012486U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Griffin was convicted after a jury trial for the unauthorized transfer of food stamps in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 2024(b). He claimed Murphy was his employer and he thought it was appropriate to redeem food stamps in this manner. Repeatedly denying that Griffin was her employee. Additional background facts are set forth in our opinion affirming the conviction on direct appeal. After Griffin was sentenced to nine months in prison. The letter declared that Murphy was licensed to redeem food stamps. That she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3BB61868A8E6775588256E5A00707BF3/$file/9910478.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2001 is amended as follows: At slip op. 4634. Insert the following paragraph in its place: The 1994 Guideline version of § 5G1.3(c) is more favorable to King than the 1995 Guideline version. Delete the sentence reading </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EAD04BB4D18492C188256E5A00707C1D/$file/9910478.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2001 is further amended as follows: At slip op. 9185. We conclude that jurisdiction is proper. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/12/033674P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated persons whose child support is processed by and through the Central Disbursement Agency. Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated persons whose child support is processed by and through the Central Disbursement Agency. Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated persons whose child support is processed by and through the Central Disbursement Agency. Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated persons whose child support is processed by and through the Central Disbursement Agency. Plaintiffs argue that the district court erred in holding that they have failed as a matter of law to establish a violation of a federal statutory right that is enforceable under § 1983 or to establish a violation of a federal constitutional right. Some of plaintiffs' claims were dismissed. Eleventh Claim: Plaintiffs claim that they are deprived of property by the taking of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/394BD77F2F27278688256A8F0057E24A/$file/9910478.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2001 is amended as follows: At slip op. 4634. Insert the following paragraph in its place: The 1994 Guideline version of § 5G1.3(c) is more favorable to King than the 1995 Guideline version. Delete the sentence reading </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="322"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/94opinions/94-7050.html">LEFEVRE V. SEC DEPT OF VA<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="322"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=01&date=01&year=97">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="315"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6D85668F24A974708825718600783B13/$file/0435863.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We construe his petition as a timely filed petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).1 In his petition Almaghzar contends (1) that the frivolous asylum application bar was erroneously applied to his asylum application. (3) that Almaghzar was not allowed to present a claim under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). It is silent about how habeas petitions then pending on appeal before the circuit courts should be treated. In Alvarez Barajas we held that any such petition </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="315"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3D69A9A0A3D5BDB7882571BE007DC725/$file/0435863.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> GONZALES ORDER Respondent's Unopposed Request for Modification of the Decision is GRANTED. Is AMENDED as follows. An alien must prove that it is more likely than not that the alien would be tortured if removed. 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2). The second sentence of that paragraph is deleted. The citation to Kamalthas is moved to follow the citation to 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2). An alien must prove that it is more likely than not that the alien would be tortured if removed. 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2). Because this is a factual determination. IT IS SO ORDERED. We construe his petition as a timely filed petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).1 In his petition Almaghzar contends (1) that the frivolous asylum application bar was erroneously applied to his asylum application. (3) that Almaghzar was not allowed to present a claim under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). It is silent about how habeas petitions then pending on appeal before the circuit courts should be treated. In Alvarez Barajas we held that any such petition </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="298"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1826.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.A. was on brief. Were on brief. Yesterday's Children is a non profit corporation which operates. Evidence was heard in October 1993 by an Administrative Law Judge. His decision was reviewed by a three member panel of the NLRB. The Board reversed the ALJ and found that the employer's actions were illegal because the conduct of the two employees was protected by 7 of the Act. The facility's name was changed from Agape House to Birchwood Living Center. 2 2 issued two written reprimands and then discharged. I. The facts are now largely undisputed. During the first half of 1992 Laura Cunningham was a nursing assistant at Agape House. Smith was a charge nurse2 there. Jeffrey Cake was hired as the Executive Director of Yesterday's Children and the Administrator of Agape House. It appears that the charge nurse is the head nurse on a given shift. That is. The person at the facility who is primarily responsible for the medical care of the residents. 3 3 Leavitt. Leavitt is alternately described in the record as the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="298"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0663n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were convicted of defrauding the Department of Education by falsifying or directing the falsification of records the school was required to maintain for its students to receive financial aid. Were convicted of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371). Sahar Younes was convicted of Student Financial Aid Fraud. TTC was a for profit vocational school in Dearborn. Federal financial aid is granted in the form of direct tuition payments to qualifying schools. TTC was required. To enroll them in courses for which financial aid was available (for example. Or ATB test scores (even when the students might have possessed proper documentation at home). Linda Johnson's assistant from October 1998 until July 1999 was defendant Muna Jaber. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="296"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200605/05-1004a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was E. With her on the brief were Ronald Meisburg. With him on the briefs were Julia M. Smithfield was exceptionally hostile to union organizing activities at the Tar Heel plant. Three of Smithfield's former lawyers have intervened in support of Smithfield's petition. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov2001/00-13607.opn.html">BURTON V. TAMPA HOUS. AUTH. (11/7/2001, NO. 00-13607)<BR></A><BR> Introduction</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov2001/00-13607.opn.html">BURTON V. TAMPA HOUS. AUTH. (11/7/2001, NO. 00-13607)<BR></A><BR> Introduction</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/98-2248.htm">98-2248 -- U.S. V. SANDIA -- 08/23/1999<BR></A><BR> We affirm. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D3E88955B3DB7FB6882570FF00825FD7/$file/0335858.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Thereby extinguishing Plaintiffs' 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims.1 Plaintiffs at pertinent times were tenants of boardinghouses inspected by public health officials and secured by Seattle police. Lee at pertinent times were employees of the Seattle King County Department of Public Health. Defendant Kerlikowske was Chief of Police for the City of Seattle during the events underlying this case. Plaintiffs argue that the district court erred by granting Defendants' motions for summary judgment and that Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment as a matter of law because the search underlying this case violated the Fourth Amendment. Plaintiffs argue that they were entitled to prevail on the undisputed facts. We agree that the material facts are not in dispute. We consider the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs to the extent there is any factual dispute. Plaintiffs were detained by the Seattle police unreasonably and thus unconstitutionally. Plaintiffs argue that if they are not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/11/976055P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hartford thereafter was properly served with all objections. Hearing was held and the motion was denied mainly due to Hartford's failure to show excusable neglect in not defending its proof of claim. This motion was also denied by order entered June 6. It was not until June 17. Order.1 On that same date it also filed a Motion for Leave to Although the Notice of Appeal was submitted to the clerk for filing. It was apparently later </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200315136.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which is administered by state agencies that receive federal grants. Crawford was approached in 1996 by Edwin Kelley. Jr. redeemed from the Georgia WIC program is unknown. Knowing said assets and property to have been willfully misapplied and obtained by fraud. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1850.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom McConnell Valdes was on brief. With whom Bird Bird and Hestres was on brief. Wakefield & Spedale were on brief. Were allowed to intervene. Suit was originally brought in rem against the vessel. Were also held liable on two of the judgments (for the original charterer and another intervening charterer). The proceeds of the sale are insufficient to satisfy even these four successful claims. Were not allowed to intervene. Arguing that the district court's entry of judgment against them is in error. They argue that the two charterers were awarded excessive damages. These four appeals were consolidated. I. The underlying facts are not now in dispute. The M/V VASILIA EXPRESS was owned by Royal United Shipping. Was registered in the West Indies. During this litigation it was established that. The vessel was actually 1. A </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1865.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> W. Sullivan and Sullivan & Walsh were on brief. Were on brief. Massachusetts post office were members of a bargaining unit represented by the Union. The Union filed an action in the federal district court with a view toward vacating the arbitral award.1 Its complaint claimed that the award </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar2001/003168.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She was sentenced under the federal Sentencing Guidelines to a term of 33 months in prison. The latter guideline would have resulted in 6 12 fewer months in prison. If Smith is still applicable to Diaz's situation. Diaz challenges the amount of restitution she was order ed to pay. We hold that Diaz should have been sentenced under the fraud guideline rather than the money laundering guideline. We will vacate the sentence and remand this case to the District Court for resentencing under S 2F1.1. We will affirm the decision of the District Court with regard to the amount of restitution that Diaz must pay. Diaz and Cefaratti were responsible for day to day operations. Low interest loans from private lenders.2 The Franklin School was authorized to act as a 1. Pell Grant funds are transferred fr om the United States Treasury directly to the school's trust account. Wher e they are held in trust until the school is authorized to transfer the money into its operating account to pay the student's bills for tuition and other expenses. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1996/96a1396p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appellants claim that the Secretary's waiver was invalid and improper. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review of the matter is plenary. STATUTORY BACKGROUND AFDC is a joint federal and state program established under Title IV A of the Social Security Act. To needy dependent children and the parents or relatives with whom they are living . . . . </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="274"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0084p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sterkaj is the principal asylum applicant. His wife is a derivative applicant relying on his application. The Immigration and Nationalization Service (INS) sought their removal on two grounds: (1) they attempted to procure admission by fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) and (2) they did not have valid entry documents as required by 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). Sterkaj attended the Democratic Party (DP) rallies in Albania but was not a member. Sterkaj was at his wife's house. Sterkaj that the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3320_017.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ayi is a native of Togo and was an active member of both the Togolese League for Human Rights and the Union des Forces du Changement. Both of these organizations are established political and human rights groups opposed to the ruling government. Because the Immigration Judge's adverse credibility finding is speculative and not based on substantial evidence. I. Background Ayi was born in Togo and is a member of the Mina ethnic tribe. He was an engineer. Ayi wrote articles that were published in opposition newspapers and he joined the Togolese League for Human Rights ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C8F2AEBE9764448588256E300069B8B0/$file/0170724.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: We write en banc to clarify that the acceptance of a criminal defendant's guilty plea is a judicial act distinct from the acceptance of the plea agreement itself. The conditions under which the plea may be withdrawn are governed exclusively by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.1 Where a district court accepts a plea of guilty pursuant to a plea agreement. The district court's choice to do so here was error. As is commonly the case. Although most changes were intended to be </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=12&date=01&year=95">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1997/97a1710p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> When the Social Security Act was amended to eliminate benefits for disability caused by alcohol and drug addiction. The district court decided that the distinction was based on whether the disability existed on the effective date of the amendment. That the test is whether the claims had been </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/feb96/94-3427.html">UNITED STATES V. MARTINEZ<BR></A><BR> Consulting and advice 1 EAPs are an in house resource for employees seeking assistance in such areas as personal counseling. In contrast Garcia testified that he never provided any such services and that the monthly payments were in exchange for his patient referrals. This consulting agreement was terminated in December 1991. Was given probation and a fine. He testified that the agreement was merely an effort to legitimize payments to him for patient referrals. The government's evidence established that defendant was Garcia's primary contact and was in charge of referrals. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-1036a.html">CHAMBER CMERC US V. OSHA<BR></A><BR> With <p> him on the briefs were <i>William J. Argued the cause for respondents. <p> With him on the brief were <i>Joseph M. Issued a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199904/98-1036a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were William J. With him on the brief were Joseph M. Issued a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6C787AC61C157D8E88257074005A456D/$file/0355166.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The question presented is whether California Assembly Bill 1889. Is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act.1 As we explain. The California statute chills employers from exercising their free speech rights that are explicitly protected by Congress under the National Labor Relations Act. That the use of the state spending power is rarely a defense to state interference with the National Labor Relations Act. 290 91 (1986) (emphasizing that Congress would not have intended to allow states to interfere with the NLRA </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=09&date=01&year=02">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2D6495646EB35EBE882571ED007FCF23/$file/0455122.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Our jurisdiction is pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Are not suspected of fraud or ineligibility. Are automatically enrolled in Project 100%. The parties are essentially in agreement as to the structure and operation of Project 100%. The visit includes a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/11/97-3059.htm">97-3059 -- GUST V. JONES -- 11/12/1998<BR></A><BR> Plaintiff Emery Gust was a passenger in the truck operated by Mr. Dighera was proceeding south on Highway 75 and. Dighera also was partially to blame for the accident. Dighera moved the court to direct a verdict that he was not liable for Mr. Dighera thirty five percent responsible.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031638.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The safety relief valves are mechanical devices used to release pressure within pipes carrying potentially hazardous materials at the facility. There are approximately 650 safety relief valves at the Natrium. The Union discovered that PPG was sending some of these valves off site to be inspected and repaired by outside shops. PPG was authorized to contract out the testing and repair work for all </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C13272C1707802B788256D800051CE88/$file/0216778.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is GRANTED. 11096 UNITED STATES v. Is hereby withdrawn and replaced with the following opinion. 2003 are denied as moot. Concluding that it was not grossly disproportional to the gravity of Mackby's offense. Who is neither a physician nor a physical therapist. Medicare Part B is a voluntary insurance program that pays a portion of the costs of some services not covered by Part A. 42 U.S.C. § 1395k. The clinic was subject to the cap applicable to a PTIP. Because the government was led to believe that Dr. Mackby was supervising physical therapy. Did not provide or direct any medical services at the clinic and did not know his son was using his PIN. Mackby himself is a layperson and did not provide physical therapy or other medical services to patients. A physical therapist in independent practice was defined as one who engaged in the practice of physical therapy on a regular basis without the administrative and professional control of an employer. We further held that both the treble damages and the civil monetary penalty provided for in the FCA are. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan95/94-8097_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May1998/98a1865p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Bardul Taftsiou was convicted in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey of possessing. His son James Taftsiou was convicted of dealing and conspiring to pass approximately $1 million in counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes. We will affirm. Both denominations of counterfeit bills were printed with magnetic ink so that they would be accepted by slot machine bill validators in Atlantic City. Nevada.1 After the printing operations were underway. Who informed the police when she realized the bills were counterfeit. Both genuine and counterfeit notes were found in Mahamoud's room and on his person. 000 of the Taftsious' counterfeit notes was passed in slot machines in various Atlantic City casinos over the Memorial Day weekend. If the bill is accepted. James and his friend Bujar Musa were captured on casino surveillance videotapes passing the counterfeit notes in various slot machines. Bardul and some of his family members were arrested in November 1995 at Tropworld Casino in Atlantic City where they passed counterfeit bills into slot machines while Bardul collected the casino tokens from them and exchanged them for genuine currency. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200311016.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> WIC is a federal program designed to provide </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan95/94-8097_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3D534390583B882F88256C380004FE18/$file/0056603.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Total Myanmar was appointed Operator of the Gas Production Joint Venture and the Gas Transportation Company. Total Myanmar was responsible. For </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/964871.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Mike Kazinec were all convicted of conspiracy to transport or receive stolen goods. Actually was a largescale fence who bought stolen OTC and HBA from a number of shoplifters and smalltime fences. There was evidence that only four of the defendants. Actually knew that his OTC and HBA was stolen. The government proceeded on the dubious theory that the defendants were deliberately ignorant to the true source of Thomas's OTC and HBA because Thomas's operation was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021215.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 7 the word </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0115p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The petitions have been circulated not only to the original panel members but also to all other judges* of the court in regular active service. Less than a majority of whom have voted in favor of rehearing en banc. The petitions have been returned to the panel for decision. Upon consideration of the petitions and the response the panel concludes that the issues raised therein were fully considered upon the original submission and decision of the case. Each of the requests for rehearing is therefore denied. Copies of that decision and the revised concurrence are attached hereto. * Judge Daughtrey recused herself from participation in this ruling. 1 No. 04 5887 United States v. Ignores the fact that those decisions have been severely undermined and limited by other Eighth Circuit decisions. The panel's decision is incorrect and it undermines both the purposes of the exclusionary rule and the good faith exception. The police had information that Leon was heavily involved in drug importation into the United States. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/053484p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were charged in a seventy eight count indictment with various criminal offenses. Conspiracy.1 In connection with There are seven defendants in this case: (1) United Corporation ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0412n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Meaning that they would not normally have owed federal income tax. Much less have been entitled to a tax refund. Was fictitious. The tax return also indicated that the client was responsible for qualifying minor dependents and therefore eligible for the earned income tax credit. Received tax refunds to which they were not entitled as a result of Allen's falsification of their tax returns. The government contended that the people in whose names Allen prepared tax returns were not in fact Allen's clients. These tax refunds were allegedly sent to and deposited by other clients of Allen's. No motion for a new trial was ever filed. Standard of review We are limited in our review of Allen's claim that there was insufficient evidence to convict her because she failed to renew her motion for a judgment of acquittal after the jury returned its verdict. The standard of review for Allen's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence against her is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043241np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She was not entitled to relief because she had </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1774.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> L.L.P were on brief. Were on brief. Which was made without affording Beverly an opportunity to submit written briefs. Beverly argues that the regulation is unlawful. We conclude that there is such substantial evidence. The union negotiator indicated that the company would have to come up from its three percent figure if the parties were to reach agreement. The parties went on to discuss an unrelated dispute (whether certain employees were part of the bargaining unit) and tempers flared. While these negotiations were taking place. Included in its new system was a new policy requiring unit employees to pay a five dollar fee for lost timecards. A hearing was held before a Board ALJ. The Board ordered the company immediately to put into effect the annual four percent wage increases that were customary prior to January 1. Standard of Review The applicable standard of review for NLRB action is provided by the National Labor Relations Act. These statutes require us to apply different standards of review depending upon what type of determination we are reviewing. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/984925.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Senior Judge Hall was assigned to the panel for this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel. 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). * PER CURIAM: A jury convicted Appellant Patsy Oforha of several charges involving food stamp fraud based on his conduct as a clerk in a small convenience store. Oforha was convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 371 (West Supp. 1999). Oforha contends that the district court's conscious avoidance instruction was plain error. See United States We find that the evidence supported the instruction and it was proper because it focused on whether Oforha had knowledge of the conspiracy's unlawful purpose. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional process. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1300.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> LLC were on brief for appellant A.E. Whitney and Roach & Wise were on brief for appellee Quint. Either functioned haphazardly or in some instances were inoperable. The work area was unheated and open to the outdoors both in winter and summer. CTS is a condition in which the median nerves and nerve tendons which pass through the carpal tunnel ÄÄ a narrow. CTS is caused by repetitive. Sigsbee confirmed that Quint did indeed have work related CTS. Fearing that Quint would spoil Staley's spotless workplace safety record were she to file a workers' compensation claim. Sigsbee characterized as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june99/97-7024.man.html">COOPER/T. SMITH, INC. V. NLRB (6/14/1999, NO. 97-7024)<BR></A><BR> That the NLRB should not have certified the union because the docking pilots are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1133.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Kuchta & Brinker were on brief for petitioner. Were on brief for respondent. The complaint also claimed that Penobscot was entitled to an evidentiary hearing pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 46101. I BACKGROUND Penobscot is a tenant leasing space at Knox County Regional Airport. It is a fixed base operator (FBO) at the airport. The ROD also found that Penobscot was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing in this case. II Standard of Review The applicable standard of review for FAA action is provided by the Federal Aviation Act and. These statutes require us to apply different standards of review depending upon what type of determination we are reviewing. We review the FAA's findings of fact to determine whether they are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3205.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the en banc court is evenly divided. Elite failed to verify that all of its new employees were authorized to work in the United States. Zamora was a Mexican citizen who had been a permanent legal resident of the United States since 1987. Zamora also filled out an I 9 form truthfully indicating that he was a Mexican citizen and a lawful permanent resident of the United States. Elite received a tip that the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)(3) was going to investigate warehouses in the area. Elite was particularly concerned about such an investigation in light of its earlier hiring practices in June 2000. This investigation indicated that someone other than Zamora had been using the same social security number that he was using.(4) The investigation turned up similar problems with thirty five other employees' social security numbers. Tucker followed this same procedure with the other thirty five employees whose social security numbers raised concerns.(5) The memorandum Tucker gave Zamora and the other affected workers read: It is required by federal law that all employees produce documents. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1618.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for petitioner. Were on brief for respondent. Kelley was terminated from her sales representative position. The date by which a response to the settlement offer was due. Kelley's attorney discussed the procedures for filing unfair labor practice charges with the Board information officer for Region 1 and specifically asked whether her client was responsible for serving DBS with a copy of the charge filed against it. Was served on DBS July 8. Which was accompanied by notice of a November 7. The complaint allegations and raising the affirmative defense that Kelley's action was time barred. Was served one day after the six month limitations period established by statute. The Board found that there are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/022662p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Brodie was found guilty by a jury of conspiring to trade with Cuba in violation of the American Cuban embargo currently in place under the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971087.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 3 counsel's name is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-1112a.html">PA ST EDUC ASSOC V. NLRB<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1863.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is corrected as follows: On page 3. Coffin & Rudman were on brief. Were on brief. After the parties have rested. We hold that it is within the trial court's discretion to tailor a front pay award to take account of collateral benefits in a discrimination case. We hold that once the record is closed. His future earnings and fringe benefits over a projected 25 year work expectancy would have aggregated between $790. Moreover 1The named defendant is the Postmaster General. The Service is the real party in interest. We treat it as such. 4 it is said. Lussier had applied for CSRS benefits only a few weeks before trial and the precise benefit level was. That Lussier was slated to receive increased VA benefits worth $358. There was a rub: declaring itself </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/08/032366P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I Stanley and Patricia are husband and wife and live near Kansas City. Which was in default. EMC's motion to lift the automatic stay was granted and it proceeded with foreclosure. The Starks were represented throughout the foreclosure and bankruptcy proceedings by attorney Roy True who notified EMC's attorney. The order compelling arbitration is not at issue in this appeal. Telephone or in person at least ten times after being advised they were represented by counsel. 2 After these incidents. The Starks contended the limitation on punitive damages was unconscionable and unenforceable. The arbitrator concluded the limitation was ambiguous and construed the language against EMC. In at least three places the Stark's [sic] are promised that they can seek all damages allowed by law. Then that promise is taken away. This is the keystone of an ambiguous contract. The Agreement is to be interpreted in their favor. As a matter of law they are not prohibited from seeking punitive damages from EMC. Id. app. at 17.1 The arbitrator indicated the award of punitive damages was calculated as one percent of EMC's shareholder equity. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/12/023512P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> When it determined that he was not illiterate. Who is now forty two years old. Hensley was unable to return to work or undertake many daily life activities. Our review of the Social Security Commissioner's final decision is deferential. We review that decision only to ensure that it is supported by </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021215R1.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> No. 02 1267 ORDER Before the Court is the appellant's petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc. Panel rehearing is hereby denied. Rehearing en banc is also hereby denied. Which are filed herewith. This Order is entered for the Court at the direction of Judge King. Any disagreement I have with them is in matters of inconsequential detail. I. I am struck with the reliance by the panel on what it obviously believes is some kind of impure motivation on the part of VMI. Although stating that it agreed with the conclusion of the district court that part of VMI's educational mission in the eyes of General Bunting is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-1876.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Did not have a well founded fear of future persecution 1 Congress transferred the functions of the former INS to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on March 1. We will refer to the former INS as the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200413176.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Her DIB application was denied in August 1996. On appeal before this court the Social Security Administration ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1066.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Gregory Bey's direct appeal languished in the Indiana state court system for nearly ten years before it was finally resolved. After waiting several minutes and when the employees were no longer able to hear the voices of the robbers. Their descriptions of the robbers' features were relatively consistent. Hampton met collectively with a police artist and provided a description that was subsequently used in the creation of composite sketches of the two robbers. The police received information that Gregory Bey might have been involved in the McDonald's robbery and Bible's murder. The record is clear that these photos were of poor quality and that no witness was able to positively identify the suspect from the photo display. As the face is largely shadowed. 1163.)1 Detective Elmer Combs was also in possession of another (color) photo of Gregory Bey (marked as State Exhibit 4. This photo was much clearer than the one Jackson had. The face in Combs' photo is clearly visible. Hair style) are clearly distinguishable. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=02&date=01&year=97">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1254.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Jack Comart and Pine Tree Legal Assistance were on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief for State of Maine. BACKGROUND AFDC is a voluntary. A dollar is subtracted from the family's basic AFDC grant for every dollar of supplemental income received. This phenomenon is known as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/02/02-3202.htm">02-3202 -- LEDBETTER V. CITY OF TOPEKA KANSAS -- 02/06/2003<BR></A><BR> Ledbetter's claims against the individual defendants and that the court's grant of summary judgment to the City of Topeka was proper.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0426n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are not persuaded that the district court abused its discretion or otherwise erred in denying plaintiff's motion. The judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the reasoning employed by that court in its Order dated May 27. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1107.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C.</U> were on brief. Burling</U> were on brief. Flom LLP</U> were on brief. Was on brief. Were on brief. <U>Chief Judge</U>.</STRONG></FONT><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/jan96/95-1187.html">SANCHEZ V. PERRILL<BR></A><BR> Petitioner Julian Robert Sanchez was convicted in 1981 of unlawful possession of food stamps. He was sentenced to a split sentence of five years imprisonment. After serving the four months petitioner was placed on probation. Near the end of his probationary period petitioner was convicted and sentenced for possession with intent to distribute marijuana.1 Thereafter. Petitioner's probation on the original food stamp conviction was revoked. All but four months which was to be served in a treatment type institution followed by probation of four years and eight months. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1994/94a0842p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will enforce the Board's order only in part. Is a regional renter of residential and office furniture in Virginia. The CBA was to expire on October 31. A side letter agreement was reached which increased wages and extended the CBA until December 31. FRA continued to operate from its Alexandria warehouse until late 1989 because its lease there did not expire until the summer of 1990 and its Jessup facility was being renovated. Who was hired as a new warehouse manager. Fewer of FRA's employees than ever before were Union members. A decertification petition was filed by Frederick Brown. There were also discussions between warehouse manager Wilson and other employees regarding their lack of interest in Union representation and discontent over having to pay Union dues and initiation fees. 1990 bargaining session was cancelled. Delivery service also was the cause of numerous customer complaints. FRA fired three employees who raided a customer's refrigerator while relaxing in his apartment during what was supposed to be a routine delivery. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/01/962907U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was sentenced to concurrent 51 month prison terms and five years supervised release. subsequently reduced Oates's sentence to time served. month prison terms. The district court Oates later violated her release conditions and was sentenced upon revocation to concurrent 36 Oates argues that the district court failed to consider the policy statements addressing revocation of supervised release in Chapter 7 of the Sentencing Guidelines. The provisions in Chapter 7 are merely advisory and United States v. District courts must consider these do not have binding effect. We believe remand is required here. Because it is not clear whether the district court considered the Chapter 7 policy statements. provision in imposing sentence. As that conviction was a Class D felony subject to a maximum prison term of five years. The maximum term for a Class D felony upon revocation of supervised release is two years. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/06/976018P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Revoking his discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(d)(2)and ordering Debtor to turn over to the estate certain funds Kasden has obtained.1 judgment of the bankruptcy court is affirmed. REVOCATION OF DISCHARGE The purpose of a discharge in bankruptcy is to relieve an honest debtor from his financial burdens and to facilitate the debtor's unencumbered </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/06/982884P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> They concede that the cross appeal will be moot if this court affirms the district court's dismissal and summary judgment decisions. The cross appeal is therefore moot. The specific allegations pertinent to our discussion are found in paragraphs 9 through 32 of the First Amended Complaint. Sheet Metal Workers Local 36 is a member of the St. The Specification stated that all subcontractors were covered by the terms and conditions of the General Contract. One of the companies who submitted a bid for the School Project was Wachter. K.C.'s mechanical subcontracting bid was the lowest responsible mechanical subcontractor bid submitted to Wachter for the School Project. Inc.) were not signatory to an AFL CIO collective bargaining agreement. The bids for the School Project were publicly opened and read aloud on the morning of June 24. Wachter was the low bidder. When Wachter learned that it was the low bidder. The School Board was scheduled to hold a meeting at which it was to vote on the award of the contract for the School Project. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0009p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner is a gainfully employed legal immigrant in her early twenties who currently studies psychology at Wayne State University in Detroit. The agency would have processed her application before Petitioner's eighteenth birthday and she would now in all likelihood be an American citizen. Petitioner was never convicted of any crime. Her parents are citizens. Her siblings are citizens. The INS had the right under section 322(a) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0083p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Introduction and Facts This is an action to enforce a judgment. Was registered in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky on April 3. McMahan's efforts were largely unsuccessful. As is the standard procedure to challenge a bank's garnishment disclosure in Kentucky. P. 69 (a) (federal garnishments are to proceed according to the laws of the state in which the federal court sits). Finding that the Bank did not possess any Po Folks property on 1 date and the time the garnishment the orders were received. Discovery revealed that the reason the Bank did not satisfy the garnishment orders served by McMahan was because of the internal procedures of the Bank. The named accounts were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/032480P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Quiroz received a downward departure for her substantial cooperation and was sentenced to concurrent sixty month terms of imprisonment for both offenses. Quiroz was prohibited from committing further federal. Quiroz was further required to satisfactorily participate in a community treatment center program. Quiroz was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. The District Court issued an arrest warrant and Quiroz was arrested on November 26. Quiroz was interviewed by United States Customs Service Agent James Cheatham about her involvement in a cocaine distribution ring. The government's sole witness at the revocation hearing was Agent Cheatham. Cheatham prepared an arrest report that was provided to Quiroz's probation officer. Which analyzed the substance and prepared a report that concluded the substance was indeed cocaine. The cocaine and the laboratory report were admitted into evidence at the revocation hearing. All of which he claimed not to have seen prior to the hearing. Trial courts are to be given </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june99/97-7024.man.html">COOPER/T. SMITH, INC. V. NLRB (6/14/1999, NO. 97-7024)<BR></A><BR> That the NLRB should not have certified the union because the docking pilots are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0172p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He argues that the denaturalization order is not supported by the evidence. Iwan Mandycz was born in Olievo Korolivka. A small village located in what was then Poland. For a time was Nazi Germany. For a longer time was the Soviet Union and is now Ukraine. Mandycz was one such recruit. All guards at Trawniki signed a declaration that they were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5E1AF153144E0AD988257187007B96C2/$file/0371066.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision that denied them asylum on the ground that they were firmly resettled in Canada after fleeing persecution in Fiji and before arriving in the United States. The Attorney General is precluded from granting asylum to an alien who was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200002/97-5031a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were David W. Michaelson was with him on the brief. Dunham were on the brief for amici curiae The Association of American Medical Colleges. With her on the brief was Valerie J. Michaelson were on the brief for the National Association for Biomedical Research as appellee in No. 97 5074. Landau was on the brief for amicus curiae The Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research. There are over 240 species of non human primates. Ranging from marmosets of South America that are a foot tall and weigh less than half a pound to gorillas of western Africa standing six feet tall and weighing up to 500 pounds. It proved no simple task to design regulations to promote the psychological well being of such varied species as they are kept and handled for exhibition and research. Notice of intent to issue regulations was first published in the Federal Register in 1986. Which in substance require as follows: (1) restraints are generally prohibited subject to certain exceptions as determined by the attending veterinarian or the research proposal. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200002/97-5009d.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were David W. Michaelson was with him on the brief. Dunham were on the brief for amici curiae The Association of American Medical Colleges. With her on the brief was Valerie J. Michaelson were on the brief for the National Association for Biomedical Research as appellee in No. 97 5074. Landau was on the brief for amicus curiae The Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research. There are over 240 species of non human primates. Ranging from marmosets of South America that are a foot tall and weigh less than half a pound to gorillas of western Africa standing six feet tall and weighing up to 500 pounds. It proved no simple task to design regulations to promote the psychological well being of such varied species as they are kept and handled for exhibition and research. Notice of intent to issue regulations was first published in the Federal Register in 1986. Which in substance require as follows: (1) restraints are generally prohibited subject to certain exceptions as determined by the attending veterinarian or the research proposal. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200002/97-5009c.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were David W. Michaelson were on the briefs for appellant National Association for Biomedical Re search in No. 97 5009. Dunham were on the brief for amici curiae The Association of American Medical Colleges. With her on the brief was Valerie J. Michaelson were on the brief for the National Association for Biomedical Research as appellee in No. 97 5074. Landau was on the brief for amicus curiae The Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research. There are over 240 species of non human primates. Ranging from marmosets of South America that are a foot tall and weigh less than half a pound to gorillas of western Africa standing six feet tall and weighing up to 500 pounds. It proved no simple task to design regulations to promote the psychological well being of such varied species as they are kept and handled for exhibition and research. Notice of intent to issue regulations was first published in the Federal Register in 1986. Which in substance require as follows: (1) restraints are generally prohibited subject to certain exceptions as determined by the attending veterinarian or the research proposal. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199711/96-7270a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sheed were on brief. Are undisputed. 1992 the grievance was submitted to arbitration pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement. What is the appropriate remedy? Id. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/02/97-3143.htm">97-3143 -- U.S. V. WATSON -- 2/10/1998<BR></A><BR> Watson ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-2006.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Any evidentiary errors made by the district court were harmless. Eleven pieces of opened mail were found in and around a public garbage can approximately one block from Redditt's home in Chicago. Postal inspectors 2 No. 03 2006 discovered that ten of the items were addressed to locations within the delivery area of the Nancy B. Jefferson Station (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0040p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the arbitrator was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/10/021068P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Requiring UNUM to pay benefits only if Smith is unable to work in any gainful occupation for which she was qualified by education. UNUM determined Smith was not totally disabled from any gainful occupation and discontinued benefits. Because we conclude UNUM's decision to discontinue Smith's disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence. I. BACKGROUND Smith is a registered nurse. Smith was terminated. Smith was eligible to receive benefits for twelve months if UNUM determined she was disabled from performing the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0099p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> In this case we are required to decide the constitutionality of Tennessee's statute making available the purchase of automobile license plates with a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0343p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Flaskamp had to serve a four year probationary period before she was eligible for tenure. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0314p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0153p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These are three consolidated appeals from judgments of the district court allowing the bankruptcy trustee to avoid mortgages held by the defendants. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Our review is de novo. I. We must decide whether the trustee was entitled to avoid the three mortgages under Ohio law. A bankruptcy trustee </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/12/052995P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Background Long Soldier was arrested after an investigation conducted by the Office of Recoveries and Fraud Investigation for the South Dakota Department of Social Services (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0041p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> File Name: 00a0041p.06 plaintiff does not even allege that in the case at hand the avenues for prompt judicial review were somehow inadequate. Access to the federal courts in this case was immediate. A decision was rendered promptly (the ordinance was enacted on August 11. Is satisfied on these facts because. The broad language of FW/PBS holds only that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/09/054470P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She argues that (1) the evidence was not sufficient to support her conviction. United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 1 Johnson was employed with the State of Nebraska between 1988 and 2002. A position that was later reclassified as a social services worker. Johnson was responsible for determining client eligibility for Nebraska public assistance as well as authorizing and issuing benefits. Which are checks made out by the State of Nebraska and issued. The superseding indictment charged that Johnson entered false or misleading information into the State's computer program to qualify individuals for Nebraska public assistance benefits who were not otherwise eligible. Denay Ward was the subject of the charges in Count I of the indictment. Ward was nonetheless entitled to a check to purchase a washer and dryer. The treasury warrant that formed the basis of Count I was a check for $375 that Ward received in the mail under the Child Care Program. Despite the fact that she was not using daycare at the time. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/02/062713P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The couple was convicted of conspiracy. I. BACKGROUND The following recitation of facts is stated in the light most favorable to the jury's verdict. Once they were issued the credit cards. Was ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $45. Honarvar contends that the questions regarding annual household income on the disputed credit card applications were too ambiguous to form the basis of prosecution for false statements. That there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions on all charges. Zamanian likewise claims there was insufficient evidence supporting the convictions for bank fraud. The crux of Zamanian's argument is that the government failed to prove that he acted with the subjective state of mind that makes an objectively false statement criminal. That is. That he knowingly stated his income at a much higher level than it actually was with the intent to defraud or influence the financial institutions issuing the credit cards. Were knowingly false. 2 was that when they completed the applications they fully expected to make upwards of $82. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/952820P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That is. The government's key witnesses were two former administrators of Dr. Jain was then a North Hills Hospital ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034847np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> HUB's principal argument is that the District Court erred in its ruling because 2 Golub was an employee with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/953996P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arguing that any wetlands that develop during wet years are subject to the easements' restrictions. Acquisition was made subject to the consent of the state in which the land was located. 16 U.S.C. § 715f.2 The Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act was passed in 1934 to fund the acquisition of bird sanctuaries. 48 Stat. 451 (1934) (codified as 16 U.S.C. § 718 et seq. (1994)). Each square mile of the drift plain is dotted by as many as seventy to eighty potholes. These geographical attributes are of particular importance to certain migratory waterfowl that prefer these potholes as a habitat to raise their young because they provide isolated protection and a source of aquatic food. Federal law was amended in 1958 to permit the acquisition of wetland easements on individual parcels which were designated </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/10/954109P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The principal issue on appeal is whether the district court1 erred by admitting evidence of Moore's prior conviction and Jones's prior arrest for cocaine offenses. Jones and Moore were tried together and neither testified. conviction. We will briefly summarize On the appeal. Each argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his government's evidence at trial. Two confidential informants advised Omaha police that three African American men were distributing crack cocaine from the Excel Inn in Omaha. The men returned in the Cutlass As the and were stopped by Omaha police officers in the Inn's parking lot. between the rear seat cushions. officers approached the vehicle. One noticed a passenger insert his hands Jones was the owner and driver of the car. Moore was the rear seat passenger. They found that Jones was carrying $900 and Moore $600. A common unit of exchange for crack Jones was also carrying a mobile pager. They found twentynine ounces of crack cocaine and drug paraphernalia suggesting crack Clothes found in the room suggested two occupants Several of Jones's personal documents were the size of Jones and Moore. found. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200614950.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This court is confronted again by a third party attempt to intervene in a long pending case to vacate injunctive relief entered below. The challenged consent decree was obtained by a class of African American plaintiffs as part of the landmark Dillard litigation that restructured much of Alabama's county level governance in accordance with the then prevailing understanding of the Voting Rights Act. (Motion for Status One of the issues presented by the merits of this appeal is whether the restrictions of Holder and Nipper apply to consent decrees where the form of the relief has been agreed to by the parties. Cumulative voting remedy was not appropriate </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=06&date=01&year=00">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011338.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 6 the citation is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/32B37758CD4ABCD388256D81005C00CF/$file/0155169.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Effects an unconstitutional taking.1 I Jerry Dempsey McIntyre is incarcerated at the Warm Springs Correctional Center in Carson City. He is required to keep his money. Stat. § 209.241(1) (1995).2 Inmates are allowed to make withdrawals from their trust accounts </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19972618.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Charles Sternisha (referred to collectively as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/36D1024C27FDF13288256B3B0082FFC5/$file/0110037.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The magistrate judge did not explain the potential immigration consequences of Amador Leal's conviction when the plea was taken. The question presented here is whether immigration consequences are collateral. Or have become direct in light of the aggravated felony provisions of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). We join the First Circuit in concluding that Fruchtman is still good law. As this is the only issue on appeal. I Amador Leal is an illegal alien who was caught selling crack in February. He was charged with conspiracy to possess cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Remaining charges were dismissed. 202 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2000). 400 ecutors unlike the district court have no procedurallyimposed duty to engage in a direct/collateral effects analysis under Rule 11(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It reasons that when a plea agreement is entered into voluntarily (as here). There is nothing to suggest that the acceptance is invalid. For whether or not the agreement is knowing and voluntary. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19972618.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Charles Sternisha (referred to collectively as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6E9420B4FCF9BF00882570EB005C5D8C/$file/0430339.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He contends that his guilty plea was not knowing. Adams's guilty plea and conviction because we conclude that it was not knowing. Voluntary and intelligent in light of the district court's failure to inform him that he was subject to a mandatory fine under the Sentencing Guidelines. 1 1 U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2(c) reads as follows: (1) The minimum of the fine guideline range is the amount shown in column A of the table below. (2) Except as specified in (4) below. The maximum of the fine guideline range is the amount shown in column B of the table below. (3) Fine Table: A Minimum $ 100 $ 250 $ 500 $ 1. Adams asserts that his sole motivation for pleading guilty was the agreement he had with the Government that it would ask the district court not to impose a fine. Had the judge informed him that he was subject to a mandatory minimum fine. He would not have pled guilty. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/84D3FC04540209C788256CAD005CC43C/$file/0155455.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The bankruptcy court issued a consolidated opinion holding that Debtor's two payments to Ganis and two payments to Bank of the West were avoidable as preferential transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b). Ganis now appeals from the BAP's decision affirming the bankruptcy court's decision that the lien payoffs of two tradein vehicles were not made according to ordinary business terms as required by § 547(c)(2)(C). The bankruptcy court's findings as applied to trade ins are erroneously limited to the average transaction in the industry rather than encompassing the broad range of practices that are not unusual in the industry. Bank of the West appeals from the district court's decision (1) affirming the bankruptcy court's finding that the lien payoff of a consignment vehicle was not made according to ordinary business terms. INC. 405 finding that the refund of a mistaken double payment with regard to the financed sale of a new vehicle was made according to ordinary business terms. Hold that no further evidence of industry practices was required. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2003.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> His two suitcases were probed because they had a strong smell of glue. Heroin was found in the inner lining. A total of 563 counterfeit one hundred dollar bills were found bundled in Scharon's jeans in the two suitcases. Scharon was indicted for violating 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) & 952(a) and 18 U.S.C. 472. Scharon was again convicted. He was sentenced to 144 months of imprisonment and a five year term of supervised release. Scharon submitted his declaration form to the Customs Inspector and was referred for secondary inspection. He was working the secondary inspection table when Scharon's flight arrived. Scharon told Gonz lez that he was coming from Panama and that he was a realtor. Scharon's two suitcases were placed on the inspection table. As soon as his luggage was opened. A strong smell of glue was noticed and the contents were removed from the suitcases. Both suitcases were heavy even after the contents were removed. They were then punctured with a probe. A white powdery substance was detected. Scharon was placed under arrest. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1830.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.A. were on brief. Were on brief. That is. The results of the 1991 probe must have come as something of a shock. Rioux's final report specifically noted that there were no problems with Dantran's fringe benefit payment practices. The timing could not have been worse. The kingdom was lost). Wilkinson's final report pressed for debarment </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/98631F52138F1F8988256BBA005B26A7/$file/0135494.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Before us now is the objectors' appeal from that order. I. THE DISTRICT COURT'S PERCENTAGE CALCULATION [1] The district court found that the settlement fund was the product of the successful claim for benefits under Microsoft's 7008 VIZCAINO v. The percentage of recovery approach is used in calculating fees in common fund cases. We will do the same. The `benchmark' award is 25 percent of the recovery obtained. Objectors contend that the award is nevertheless excessive. Arguing that the court erred in failing to take into account that this is a megafund case to which it should have applied what objectors call the increase decrease rule. Was referred to the SPP administrator and subsequently to the plan's administrative committee. The issue was ready for judicial review by the district court but had not been decided when the settlement of all claims was reached. 2 VIZCAINO v. Fund size is one relevant circumstance to which courts must refer. Stating: We agree with the district court that there is no necessary correlation between any particular percentage and a reasonable fee. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/007129.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. We have reviewed the record. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001017.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appellant argues that this instruction may have caused the jury to return a lower verdict. Appellant also alleges that the award of damages was inadequate as a matter of law and that the district court erred when it failed to grant a new trial on those grounds. Were killed when the car in which they were traveling was struck by a tractor trailer delivery truck driven by Clark. The case was removed to the district court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. Witnesses testified that the family was very close and that they spent a lot of time together including frequent camping trips. Stebbins's wife was 30 years old at the time of her death and had a normal life expectancy of 80 years. Clark and England tendered an instruction that would inform the jury that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1286.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellee. They are deemed to have waived review of the earlier motion. We note also that although defendants' motions for acquittal and new trial were filed more than seven days after the verdicts were rendered and the jury discharged. The motions were timely because. See id. at 1471 (explaining that a sufficiency challenge untimely brought in the trial court is subject to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FBC218EE81DC63E288256D1000815A83/$file/0155455.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: The Slip Opinion at 415 16. Beginning at line 28: [REMOVE THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH: As we have held. While we hold to the rule that evidence as to the range of industry practice is ordinarily required. The problem of refunds of mistaken payments is exceptional. Bank of the West was subject to a legal obligation promptly to refund the money. Which would clearly have fallen within the ordinary range no matter what the relevant industry or practice. The </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1385A.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> O'Sullivan & Friedman were on brief for petitioner. Iris Gomez with whom Massachusetts Law Reform Institute was on brief for Guatemaltecos Unidos En Accion of Rhode Island and Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition. Were on brief for respondent. Cordero's principal contention is that the Board. Ignored substantial portions of the evidence and accepted inappropriate assumptions about how Guatemalan society operates in concluding that his claim to have a well founded fear of persecution if returned to Guatemala contains fatal </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FD6331A69E68ABF988256E21005E5469/$file/0270487.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a). Petitioners1 are citizens of Iran who applied for asylum in Because the petitions for Jahed's wife and children are dependent on his petition. The remainder of this opinion will discuss the proceedings by 1 560 JAHED v. The purpose of this group was to establish an impartial system of justice with the removal of torture and unwarranted executions. This is a banned opposition organization. Q. 35 I have been a member of a banned opposition organization. Our purpose was removal of the current regime and an end to torture. I didn't have the money. In any event he would have turned me in whether or not I paid. He was similarly referencing only Petitioner Jahed. Was imprisoned with his entire family in Tehran in 1987 and has not been heard of since. As we will discuss later. The State Department's relevant country report of August 1997 describes the Mojahedin and its hostile relationship to Iran's current government as follows: The Mojahedin organization is one of the most active militant Iranian opposition groupings with a world wide network of members and supporters. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/aug96/95-4120.wpd.html">RUPP V. MARKGRAF<BR></A><BR> The cashier's check was purchased using Cowboy funds and it stated on its face that it was purchased by Cowboy Enterprises. This address was not Cowboy's business address. Davis was living at the time. The cashier's check was delivered to the Markgrafs. Which was later converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation. The trustee brought this adversary proceeding in 1993 alleging that the transfer was fraudulent and seeking its avoidance and recovery against the Markgrafs under 11 U.S.C. 544(b) & 550. Was the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/April2004/023067p1.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The petition for rehearing is denied.1 Judges Chertoff and Fisher would have granted rehearing en banc. A separate Opinion of the Panel Sur Denial of Rehearing is issued regarding the denial of the petition for rehearing in order to address the issues raised in the dissent. 1 Opinion of the Panel sur Denial of Rehearing en banc OBERDORFER. De novo review is appropriate in this case because of our precedents in United States v. The earlier is the controlling authority and the latter is ineffective as precedents. Because breach of plea agreement is not an issue addressed by Rule 11. Rivera was entitled to de novo review on additional grounds independent from the rule applied in Queensborough and Moschalaidis. 1 Under Fed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct2000/991576.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Defendants are the Pennsylvania Department of Education ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-7079.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Requires a plaintiff to prove that an allegedly </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jun2001/003410.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an appeal from the dismissal under Fed. Who are cigarette wholesalers. The District Court held that plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the Sherman Act because the tobacco companies were immune from antitrust liability under both the Noerr Pennington and Parker immunity doctrines. We agree they are immune under the Noerr Pennington doctrine but not under the Parker doctrine. We will affirm. Are cigarette manufacturers who were original signatories to the Multistate Settlement Agreement. They are collectively known as the major tobacco companies or the Majors. The Majors are responsible for 98% of cigarette sales in the United States. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1996/96a1353p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiff Richard Homar was suspended without pay from his position as a police officer at East Stroudsburg University after his arrest on drug related charges. The criminal charges against Homar were eventually dismissed. Homar was nonetheless subsequently demoted to the position of groundskeeper. An employee is entitled to a hearing before any further action is taken to demote. The employee is entitled to know the evidence against him and be afforded the opportunity for a meaningful response. We conclude that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether such a hearing was afforded here. I. Plaintiff Richard Homar was employed as a police officer at East Stroudsburg University ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr98/97-6326.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. MOSAVI (4/14/1998, NO. 97-6326)<BR></A><BR> In which he sought to have set aside a criminal forfeiture imposed as part of a criminal sentence entered on March 29. The defendant argues that the 1991 criminal forfeiture of real property taken as part of his brother's sentence was a taking of his property without due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment. 936.23 forfeiture to which he was sentenced. Since the particular indictment count to which he pled guilty contained no forfeiture provision.</P> <P> There is no dispute that the appeal at issue challenges criminal forfeiture orders of criminal proceedings to which the defendant was a party. It is also clear that the defendant. Is challenging the district court's denial of a Fed. The judgment and order that the defendant contests were entered. A proper appeal of the forfeitures should have been raised in the defendant's criminal appeal of his conviction and sentence. A writ of <U>error coram nobis</U> is a limited remedy of last resort. This remedy is unavailable given that the defendant could have raised these issues on direct criminal appeal and failed to do so. <U>See</U> <U>United States v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec98/97-2952.opn.html">GONZALEZ V. LEE COUNTY HOUS. AUTH. (12/2/1998, NO. 97-2952)<BR></A><BR> A reasonable person in Moran's position would not have known that Gonzalez's letter of September 28. A reasonable person in Moran's position would have known that her termination of Gonzalez's employment was unlawful. <U>See</U> . Moran told Gonzalez that she did not want a black person placed in a vacant elderly housing unit.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-2054.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jaime Mendoza was convicted by a jury of (1) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribution of more than five kilograms of cocaine and (2) distribution of more than 500 grams of cocaine. He was sentenced to 293 months imprisonment. We affirm. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case. Nina Valdez was arrested in Albuquerque. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may2000/99-10813.man.html">TAPLEY V. COLLINS (5/5/2000, NO. 99-10813)<BR></A><BR> Holding that qualified immunity is not a defense to Federal Wiretap Act claims. The district court did not decide whether they would be entitled to qualified immunity if it is an available defense to such claims. Arguing that the district court erred in determining that the defense of qualified immunity is not available to public officials faced with Federal Wiretap Act claims.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200111/00-1392a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were Joseph M. Because the per instance penalties are unlawful. Inc. is a manufacturer of custom wire products and newspaper racks located in Shiner. An Administrative Law Judge found that 382 violations were willful and assessed an aggregate penalty of $257. Included among the unreported injuries were second and third degree burns. Hun dreds of lacerations all of which were only recorded on Kaspar Wire's first aid log. The Commission concluded that these were knowing and willful violations that reflected a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov99/97-2618.man.html">UNITED STATES V. SIGMA INT'L, INC. (11/30/1999, NO. 97-2618)<BR></A><BR> Charles Sternisha (referred to collectively as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199810/97-7043a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Steven H. Was on the brief for appellant. With him on the brief were John M. Were on the brief for intervenor United States of America. Alleg edly saying that Davis was dying of HIV. Thus he invokes the familiar taxonomy in which classifications that disadvantage a suspect class or impinge on the exercise of a fundamental right are subject to strict scrutiny. While classifications that do neither are subject only to review for rationality. Here the central claim is that Davis's right to privacy is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/994562.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Elizabeth Brown were indicted for conspiracy to commit visa and immigration fraud by operating a scheme whereby Estonian immigrants came to work in the United States. Defendants were officers of Vision Ventures. Vision Ventures was the parent company of Alpha Cleaning Systems. Defendants typically paid the Estonians between $10 and $100 per week for their services and advised them that they would have to return to Estonia if they did not work as directed. Defendants also advised the Estonians not to tell their parents that they were working. Perdue took measures to conceal some of the aliens' ages and attempted to hide the fact that 3 the aliens were residing at her house. Defendants knew that the Estonians were not supposed to be working under the immigration regulations governing their visas. Defendants claim that their view of the immigrants' activities was based on their particular religious beliefs. Or residence is or will be in violation of law [shall be punished by fine and/or imprisonment]. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992416.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. (2) the implied duty of good faith cannot override the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr98/97-6326.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. MOSAVI (4/14/1998, NO. 97-6326)<BR></A><BR> In which he sought to have set aside a criminal forfeiture imposed as part of a criminal sentence entered on March 29. The defendant argues that the 1991 criminal forfeiture of real property taken as part of his brother's sentence was a taking of his property without due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment. 936.23 forfeiture to which he was sentenced. Since the particular indictment count to which he pled guilty contained no forfeiture provision.</P> <P> There is no dispute that the appeal at issue challenges criminal forfeiture orders of criminal proceedings to which the defendant was a party. It is also clear that the defendant. Is challenging the district court's denial of a Fed. The judgment and order that the defendant contests were entered. A proper appeal of the forfeitures should have been raised in the defendant's criminal appeal of his conviction and sentence. A writ of <U>error coram nobis</U> is a limited remedy of last resort. This remedy is unavailable given that the defendant could have raised these issues on direct criminal appeal and failed to do so. <U>See</U> <U>United States v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991010.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Alleging that the appellees have engaged in a variety of activities constituting unfair trade practices. Appellant Whitfield alleges that the district court committed reversible error when it granted summary judgment to all appellees on the basis of its ruling that Whitfield's evidence of damages was too speculative to support a jury verdict. Appellant also appeals the grant of summary judgment by the district court to all appellees on the claim for civil conspiracy on the basis of its ruling that Whitfield was required to demonstrate that the appellees conspired for the purposes of injuring Whitfield in particular and on Whitfield's cause of action seeking injunctive relief under the Sherman Antitrust Act. Candace Pratt (collectively </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/987267.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Was brutally murdered during a robbery of the store. Carter was working at the Wendy's restaurant during the late evening and early morning hours. Ward was also working at the store that evening. Was still standing in the lot. A store manager arrived at the Wendy's at 5:45 a.m. and noticed that Carter's car was still in the parking lot. A female manager's tie was found entangled within a janitorial mop. Was taken from the safe. Carter's body was found about forty 2 yards from the Wendy's store. She was clad only in a pair of tennis shoes. The tongues of which were partially curled up in the shoes. The snaps of which were improperly fastened. Testified that Carter could have traversed the distance from the store to the riverbank on her own prior to a final blow that resulted in an extensive fracture of her skull. When she asked Ward why he was not at home as required by the program. Ward contacted the HWRC from his mother's house and was instructed to remain at the house until an HWRC administrator arrived. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec98/97-2952.opn.html">GONZALEZ V. LEE COUNTY HOUS. AUTH. (12/2/1998, NO. 97-2952)<BR></A><BR> A reasonable person in Moran's position would not have known that Gonzalez's letter of September 28. A reasonable person in Moran's position would have known that her termination of Gonzalez's employment was unlawful. <U>See</U> . Moran told Gonzalez that she did not want a black person placed in a vacant elderly housing unit.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may2000/99-10813.man.html">TAPLEY V. COLLINS (5/5/2000, NO. 99-10813)<BR></A><BR> Holding that qualified immunity is not a defense to Federal Wiretap Act claims. The district court did not decide whether they would be entitled to qualified immunity if it is an available defense to such claims. Arguing that the district court erred in determining that the defense of qualified immunity is not available to public officials faced with Federal Wiretap Act claims.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981965.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. The material facts are not in dispute. Plaintiffs are seven master firefighters employed by the City. It is not 1 Under the Commonwealth of Virginia's emergency medical services regulations. Basic Life Support is defined as that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981540.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 8 counsel's name is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov99/97-2618.man.html">UNITED STATES V. SIGMA INT'L, INC. (11/30/1999, NO. 97-2618)<BR></A><BR> Charles Sternisha (referred to collectively as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974713.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> No. 97 4713 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Police officers Loperl and Robinson were conducting surveillance of the Whitcomb Court housing complex from a second story apartment window for possible drug transactions. Whitcomb Court was known by police officers to be a high drug area. Saw him stop when he was approached by an unidentified female. Which was about a third the size of a postage stamp. Which was locked. Officer Rollston then informed Harmon that he was under investigative detention and patted Harmon's right front jeans watch pocket. Rollston then repeated to Harmon that he was under investigative detention. That he was not under arrest. Telling Harmon that the handcuffs were necessary for his safety and the safety of the officers. Harmon claims that the police did not have a reasonably articulable suspicion of criminal activity sufficient to justify stopping Harmon. The illegal stop turned into an arrest without probable cause at the time the handcuffs were placed on him such that his subsequent admission and the seizure of the firearm and the heroin should have been suppressed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1392a.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Argued the cause for respondent.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971954.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Which was about an hour or two before Finley's workday ended. The first instance was when Finley placed his hand on Shaver's knee during her job interview with Dixie. Shaver believed that she would not have any further </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-1169b.html">ALLI COMMTY MEDIA V. FCC<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/962817.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. William Schwieterman was acting within the scope of his employment when he filed criminal charges against her. Based on that application Dachman was arrested on July 22. The FDA subsequently concluded that the claim against Dachman was unsubstantiated. Certi2 fying that Schwieterman was acting within the scope of his employment and. The plaintiff's sole remedy was against the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2679. We held that the plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the government employee was not acting within the scope of his employment. Properly held that further discovery on the scope of employment issue was unnecessary. The court undertook its duty to determine whether Schwieterman was acting within the scope of his employment. The district court's review was not the kind of rubber stamp denounced in Gutierrez de Martinez. Dachman claims that further discovery is required on a number of disputed facts. Are undisputed. 3 Schwieterman received a threat that he correctly took seriously. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/962800.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. We grant Shaver's unopposed motion to submit the case on the briefs without oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/024759.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ABDI 3 during the course of the conspiracy was over $4.2 million. All of which was attributable to Isse and approximately $3.3 million of which was attributable to Abdi. Contending that the district court did not properly apply U.S.S.G. § 2S1.3(b)(2) so as to reduce their sentencing levels to reflect that they had no knowledge of whether the funds that they structured were the proceeds of unlawful activities or were to be used for unlawful purposes. The defendants did not ask their customers about the sources of the cash that the defendants received for transmission through Al Barakat nor the uses for which the money was to be transmitted. Although some customers told the defendants that they were sending money to relatives. Because the deposits were in cash amounts less than $10. The defendants were indicted for numerous structuring offenses. They did not know from where the customers derived the money and they did not know for what the money was to be used once it was transmitted overseas. They filed this appeal challenging the district court's determination that they were ineligible for reduction of their base offense level to level 6. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200512765.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ramirez argues that he was unlawfully detained by the police in violation of the Fourth Amendment. That therefore the evidence discovered as a result of that detention should have been suppressed. We conclude that suppression of the evidence was unwarranted. Alabama State Trooper Corporal Charlton Martin was assisting a trooper in the arrest of two individuals on the eastbound side of Interstate 10. Corporal Martin's police vehicle was parked in the emergency lane on the side of the highway. Who was present with him. Which was being driven by Ramirez. Due to some confusion as to who was the owner of the car.3 When Corporal Martin approached Ramirez and Sergeant Mitchum. He was handed Ramirez's paperwork (including his driver's license and vehicle registration) and was informed by Sergeant Mitchum that there was </TD> </TR> </TABLE> <!-- End of real page content --> <!-- kludgy empty paragraph acts as spacer --> <P></P> <!-- This is the place for the lower nav bar and footer --> <!-- the following is Mason-included: footer.htm --> <br class="clear" /> </div><!-- close extra div (opened in header.htm) --> <br class="clear" /> </div><!-- close middle (opened in header.htm) --> <div id="footer"> <div class="footerNav"> <div><!-- getting ridiculous, i know --> <ul> <li><a href="/lii.html" class="nav">about us</a></li> <li><a href="/tour.html" class="nav" id="liisitemaplink" title="lii sitemap">sitemap</a></li> <li><a href="/help/" class="nav">help</a></li> <li><a href="/comments/credits.html" class="nav">terms of use</a></li> </ul> <br class="clear" /> </div><!-- close ridiculous div --> </div><!-- close footerNav --> </div><!-- close footer --> <br class="clear" /> </div><!-- close collection (opened in header.htm) --> <br class="clear" /> </div><!-- close ours (opened in header.htm) --> <br class="clear" /> </div><!-- close container (opened in header.htm) --> <!-- end of included footer --> </BODY> </HTML> <!-- end of HTML --> <!-- code from here on down --> <!-- input arguments are: a query (optional) --> <!-- to begin with... This init block sets up and runs the query. --> <!-- select correct options based on scope -->