Rodriguez v. Wet Ink, LLC, No. 08-1313, involved an employment discrimination suit against plaintiff's former employer, the court of appeals reversed summary judgment for defendant on the ground that the state anti-discrimination agency's notice did not trigger the 90-day limitation period for purposes of filing a federal action under Title VII, because nothing in the worksharing agreement between the Colorado Civil Rights Division (CCRD) and the EEOC, or relevant case law, supported defendant's view that the CCRD could issue right-to-sue notices on behalf of the EEOC.
US v. Steele, No. 09-7108, concerned defendant's appeal from his 18-month sentence of imprisonment imposed for his second violation of the terms of his supervised release. The Tenth Circuit affirmed, on the grounds that 1) a remand was not necessary because the record on appeal was sufficient to enable adequate review; 2) the district judge clearly articulated his (self evident) reasons for imposing a sentence outside the recommended range; and 3) under the guidelines, recidivism was generally a reason for increased sentencing severity.