Cases

C. A. 5th Cir. Certio-rari denied.

*982(Reported below: 87 Fed. Appx. 930); (85 Fed. Appx. 363); (83 Fed. Appx. 620); (85 Fed. Appx. 367); (82 Fed. Appx. 901); (83 Fed. Appx. 622); (82 Fed. Appx. 902); (83 Fed. Appx. 623); (82 Fed. Appx. 908); (82 Fed. Appx. 904); (83 F

*982(Reported below: 87 Fed. Appx. 930); (85 Fed. Appx. 363); (83 Fed. Appx. 620); (85 Fed. Appx. 367); (82 Fed. Appx. 901); (83 Fed. Appx. 622); (82 Fed. Appx. 902); (83 Fed. Appx. 623); (82 Fed. Appx. 908); (82 Fed. Appx. 904); (83 F

539 U.S. 953 Garza-Hernandezv.United States.Perez-Huertav.United StatesZapata-Martinezv.United StatesSolis-Brionesv.United StatesCarbajal-Taglev.United StatesMartinez-Rodriguezv.United StatesSalinas-Rodriguezv.United StatesCortes-Gallegosv.United StatesMendoza-Martinezv.United StatesHernandez-Hernandezv.United StatesGonzalez-Medra

(Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (67 Fed. Appx. 243);

(Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (67 Fed. Appx. 243);

Appellate Case: 23-1278 Document: 113-1 Date Filed: 09/08/2025 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS September 8, 2025

In the United States Court of Federal Claims Nos. 16-1624L; 17-1931L; 17-468L; 17-4680L Filed: March 1, 2023 * * * * * * * * * ** * * ** * REINALDO CASTILLO, et al., * * Plaintiffs, * v. * * UNITED STATES, *

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 19-1603 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. ANTHONY FARMER, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE [Hon. Landya B. McCafferty, Chief U.S. District Judge]

FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH September 30, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Clerk of Court

Case: 19-1158 Document: 78 Page: 1 Filed: 02/20/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ REINALDO CASTILLO, GONZALO PADRON MARINO, MAYDA ROTELLA, JULIA GARCIA, SHOPS ON FLAGER INC., JOSE F. DUMENIGO, DORA A. DUMENIGO, HUMBERTO J. DIAZ, JOSEFA MARCIA DIAZ, LUIS CRESPO, JOSE LUIS NAPOLE, GRACE BARSELLO NAPOLE, BERNARDO D. MANDULEY, NORMA A. MANDULEY, DANILO A. RODRIGUEZ, DORA RODR

Case: 19-1158 Document: 83 Page: 1 Filed: 03/06/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ REINALDO CASTILLO, GONZALO PADRON MARINO, MAYDA ROTELLA, JULIA GARCIA, SHOPS ON FLAGER INC., JOSE F. DUMENIGO, DORA A. DUMENIGO, HUMBERTO J. DIAZ, JOSEFA MARCIA DIAZ, LUIS CRESPO, JOSE LUIS NAPOLE, GRACE BARSELLO NAPOLE, BERNARDO D. MANDULEY, NORMA A. MANDULEY, DANILO A. RODRIGUEZ, DORA RODR

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 16-1624L; No. 17-1931L Filed: October 30, 2018 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * REINALDO CASTILLO, et al., * * Plaintiffs, * v. *

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-50294 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 3:19-cr-03192-AJB-1 LUCIO MEDINA-SUAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Califor

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 16-1624L; No. 17-1931L Filed: June 29, 2018 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * REINALDO CASTILLO, et al., * * Plaintiffs, * Motion for Partial Summary v. * Judgment; Takings Claim;

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-30112 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:17-cr-00199-RSM-1 AHMAD JEROME MCADORY, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Ricardo S. Martinez, Chief District Judge, Pr

Justice KENNEDY, concurring. As sentencing laws and standards continue to evolve, cases may arise in which the formulation of a sentencing provision leads to a sentence, or a pattern of sentencing, challenged as so arbitrary that it implicates constitutional concerns. In that instance, a litigant might use the word vague in a general sense-that is to say, imprecise or unclear-in trying to establish that the sentencing decision

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2016 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

ORDER ON PETITION FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS FROM RESTRAINT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR A PRETRIAL HEARING HIGHSMITH, District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Petitioner Intergroup Investment Corporation’s Petition for Release of Funds from Restraint or in the Alternative for a Pretrial Hearing, filed February 13, 1992. 1. Background On November 22,

JONES, J. *1187This matter comes before the Court on the Motion of Defendant Aquilino Gaspar-Juarez (Gaspar-Juarez) to Dismiss Indictment. (# 15) For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Gaspar-Juarez's Motion. BACKGROUND In 2004, Gaspar-Juarez was convicted in Marion County Circuit Cou