Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Dexia Credit Local v. Rogan, No.08-3500, concerned a challenge to the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction barring defendant's wife from continuing to transfer certain assets, in supplementary proceeding to enforce a $124 million judgment against defendant and related partnerships, arising from a longstanding Medicare and Medicaid fraud scheme. Because the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the case and because the there was no abuse of discretion in entering the preliminary injunction, the decision of the district court is affirmed.
In US v. Shaaban, No. 08-4124, the Seventh Circuit faced a challenge to a conviction of a naturalized American citizen born in Jordan, in a jury trial, of acting as an agent for Iraq and other crimes and sentenced to a 160-months' imprisonment. In rejecting defendant's various claims, the court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for a new trial and did not err in its adverse ruling on a motion to reconsider the denial of demand for return of seized property as untimely.
US v. Chapa, No. 09-3285, concerned a defendant's request to vacate his conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 1,000 or more kilograms of marijuana, and to remand the case to the district court for trial. However, defendant's claim that his guilty plea was invalid is dismissed as defendant waived his right to appeal the conviction.
Schaaf v. Astrue, No. 09-2820, concerned a challenge to the district court's affirmance of ALJ's denial of claimant's application for Social Security disability benefits after he lost partial use of one arm in a snowmobile accident, claiming that he no longer could perform his past job as a mason or any other job. However, because claimant has not presented any evidence of what further evidence the ALJ would have elicited, he has not shown any prejudice. Furthermore, because the ALJ did not err in concluding that there was no evidence that any side effects from medications would prevent claimant from working, the decision of the district court is affirmed.