Kary DeVaney

9th Circuit Court of Appeals (71 summaries)

United States v. Reza-Ramos

Because jurisdiction depends upon the victim’s status as an Indian, the government has the burden to prove the victim’s status when a non-Indian commits a criminal offense against an alleged Indian on a federally recognized reservation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Melendres v. Maricopa County

28 U.S.C. § 2107(a) and Rule 4(a) require appeals to be filed within thirty days of entry of the order appealed.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

United States v. Zhou

The government may revoke a citizen’s naturalization if it was procured illegally.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

United States v. Hernandez-Castro

A sentence consistent with a negotiated plea agreement may not be appealed unless an appellate waiver applies.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Mena v. Long

A district court may hold a petition in stay and abeyance even when all claims in a habeas corpus petition are unexhausted.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Ayala v. Davis

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, a denial of relief that is not objectively unreasonable precludes any relief sought.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Daire v. Lattimore

Supreme Court precedent has “clearly established” that the Strickland standard applies to all claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in noncapital sentencing proceedings.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

United States v. Cruz-Mendez

To be applicable for the “pilot/captain” enhancement, the defendant need only act as operator of a vessel carrying a controlled substance.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Rizo v. Lynch

An order of removal is final even when a voluntary departure proceeding is pending and therefore the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction to review the removal order.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Cuprite Mine Partners v. Anderson

A trial in suit for partition by sale required by Arizona law is procedural and therefore a federal court in diversity is required to follow federal procedural rules.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

United States v. Taylor

A violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014, for making a false statement, requires that the statement knowingly be false to influence the bank’s actions in a banking transaction, but not that the bank bear any risk of loss or liability.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Talaie v. Wells Fargo Bank

Absent any clear intent of Congress for retroactivity, 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g) notice requirement to borrowers within thirty days from when their mortgage is sold, transferred, or assigned to a third party does not apply retroactively.

United States v. Medina-Carrasco

A plea agreement is not ambiguous if the sentence given is within the range contemplated by the plea agreement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

United States v. Falcon

The repeal of the statute of limitations for federally guaranteed student loan collection does not violate a student loan debtor’s due process rights.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

United States v. Conti

Omission of an element from jury instructions is not plain error where the facts supporting the element are proven by strong and convincing evidence.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Swoger v. Rare Coin Wholesalers

A continuance to conduct discovery is not appropriate when the party seeking the continuance had not diligently pursued the information requested.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Pena v. Lynch

Absent a few enumerated exceptions, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act does not allow any court to review a final expedited removal order.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

United States v. Augare

“Sophisticated means” sentencing enhancement is applicable when a defendant employs coordinated and repetitive conduct to execute a criminal scheme.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Andrade v. Lynch

Evidence of an asylum seeker’s non-gang related tattoos alone does not support a finding under the Convention Against Torture that the seeker is more likely than not to be tortured when removed to his home country.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Eno v. Jewell

Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, any grant of permission from the United States government is a license, regardless of form, and does not qualify as an adversary adjudication allowing the recovery of attorneys’ fees and expenses.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

United States v. Chadwell

A district court has the discretion to provide technology to the jury in order to view properly admitted video evidence in the jury deliberation room.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Amity Rubberized Pen Co. v. Mkt. Quest Grp.

Patent claims fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit, the court of appeals has no authority to decide a patent case on its merits. However, the court of appeals has the authority to transfer a case to the Federal Circuit if that court would have had jurisdiction at the time of filing and the transfer is in the interest of justice.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

United States v. Ye

A conviction for providing false information in a passport application does not require specific intent; the party need only willfully and knowingly supply an untrue statement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

McBride v. Lopez

To make a showing that an administrative remedy is effectively unavailable to an aggrieved inmate due to fear of retaliation for lodging a complaint, and therefore need not exhaust the administrative remedy prior to filing a claim in federal court, the inmate must show that the threat of retaliation deterred him from filing a grievance and that the threat would deter a reasonable inmate from pursuing the grievance procedure.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Addington v. US Airline Pilots Association

In a collective bargaining context, the duty of fair representation is analogous to a fiduciary duty and must be exercised without hostility or discrimination against any members.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

Rosati v. Igbinoso

A complaint should not be dismissed without leave to amend deficiencies, unless the court finds it absolutely clear that amendment could not cure the deficiencies.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Benko v. Quality Loan Service Corp.

A federal court lacks jurisdiction to hear a removed case due to the “local controversy exception” when (1) more than two-thirds of the class is from the state of the original filing; (2) at least one defendant seeks significant relief from the plaintiff whose alleged conduct forms a significant basis for the claims asserted; and (3) principal injuries related to the conduct occurred in the state of filing.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

United States v. Lizarraga-Tirado

A satellite image makes no assertion, cannot be hearsay, and therefore does not violate the Confrontation Clause.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

United States v. Alcantara-Castillo

A prosecutor may not create a scenario to force a defendant to testify on a government witness’s credibility.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Bemore v. Chappell

Fraudulent misappropriation of defense funds does not create a conflict of interest absent a showing that the misuse caused counsel to investigate the case less thoroughly than counsel otherwise would.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Flam v. Flam

Federal magistrate judges have no authority to make determinations on motions to remand because magistrate judges lack the authority to rule on dispositive motions.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

A-1 A-Lectrician v. Snipes

Statutory definitions are not considered vague when a limiting construction is provided for the court to apply to challenged terms.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Diaz v. Kubler Corp.

A debt collector is not prohibited from seeking an amount expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Consumer Credit

Castro v. County of Los Angeles

Individual defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity when a constitutional protection is established at the time of the incident, and when sufficient evidence shows that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of harm to the plaintiff.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Qualified Immunity

Melendres v. Arpaio

An improperly joined non-jural entity may be dismissed and the proper entity added without harm to the underlying proceeding.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Golden v. Cal. Emergency Physicians

When determining whether a settlement agreement is reviewable, traditional standards of ripeness apply. Additionally, covenants not to compete are not necessarily prohibited under section 16600 of the California Business and Professions Code.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

United States v. Simmons

The crime of escape does not inherently include a risk of physical injury to another and is not roughly similar to the offenses enumerating in the United States Sentencing Guidelines for the purpose of determining whether a defendant is a career offender for sentencing purposes.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

United States v. Haischer

A defendant in a criminal prosecution is not required to admit guilt as a precondition to raising an affirmative defense.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

United States v. Hymas

A preponderance of the evidence standard is appropriate when calculating losses due to charged conduct; and a clear and convincing standard is appropriate when calculating losses related to dismissed charges.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Navarro v. Encino Motorcars

Where there is more than one reasonable interpretation of an administrative regulation, and the administrative agency has accepted one of those interpretations, the court must defer to that decision.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Labor Law

Lisker v. Monsue

Police officers acting as witnesses may claim absolute immunity to protect themselves from liability for testimony at trial and preparatory activities “inextricably tied” to testimony at trial.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Reid v. Johnson & Johnson

Claims of “no trans fat” authorized by the FDA may mean that the product contains an insignificant amount of trans fat.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Standing

Rudin v. Myles

When a defendant diligently pursues her right to habeas corpus relief but extraordinary circumstances prevent her from timely filing a petition, she may be eligible for equitable tolling of the statute of limitations.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Khudaverdyan v. Holder

A finding of political persecution that would qualify the seeker for asylum may be supported by a demonstration of imputed political opinion.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Mays-Williams v. Williams

Under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, a plan participant must substantially comply with governing plan documents when requesting a change in beneficiary designation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

In re Sussex

An arbitrator’s professional relationships must create a reasonable impression of partiality in order to rise to a claim of bias sufficient to require a remedy.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Arbitration

United States v. Rodman

Providing inaccurate information to a federal agency, via an agreement between two or more individuals, is sufficient to constitute a conspiracy to impair the function of that agency, even when no evidence exists to prove an additional injury to the agency.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

United States v. Gnirke

Restrictions to non-pornographic sexually explicit material containing adults deprive a greater liberty interest than is reasonably necessary.

Area(s) of Law:
  • First Amendment

United States v. Camou

A search of a cell phone’s contents is not incident to arrest if it is not roughly contemporaneous to the arrest.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. USDA

Approval of a management plan is sufficient to establish causation and redressability.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Environmental Law

Shell Gulf of Mex. v. Ctr. for Biological Div.

A party does not have an adverse legal interest that satisfies the case or controversy requirement merely because it could be impacted by potential legal action of another.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Spinedex Physical Therapy v. United Healthcare

A healthcare provider maintains Article III standing to bring claims against an assignee plan beneficiary for denied benefits but not for breach of fiduciary duty.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Insurance Law

United States v. Morales Heredia

When the government commits to a plea agreement, it may not use prejudicial or inflammatory language to implicitly argue for a sentence harsher than the agreed upon sentence.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

EEOC v. Peabody Western Coal Co.

Tribal hiring preferences are not discriminatory because tribal affiliation is a political classification and not a national origin classification.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tribal Law

The Boeing Company v. Raphael

A state’s authority to regulate nuclear safety is preempted by the federal government’s control over the field of nuclear safety.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Environmental Law

In re: Snowden

Emotional distress damages are proper when a debtor suffers significant emotional harm, establishes the significant harm, and shows a causal connection between the harm and an automatic stay violation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Tarabochia v. Adkins

Department of Fish and Wildlife officers cannot invade a party’s right not to be stopped without having reasonable suspicion that the party had or was about to engage in unlawful activity.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

United States v. Fowlkes

The forcible removal of drugs from an arrestee’s body cavity requires a warrant and that personnel with medical training execute the warrant.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Stanley v. Chappell

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act requires postponement of federal review of a state court ruling until all state court remedies have been exhausted.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

McDaniels v. Kirkland

A court is not required to sua sponte augment a trial record to allow for comprehensive comparative juror analysis when making a determination of whether racial discrimination occurred during jury selection.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Avila v. LAPD

When an employee’s testimony provides a motivating factor in that employee’s termination, the employer has violated the FLSA’s anti-retaliation provision, 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3), and the employee may recover liquidated damages.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Labor Law

United States v. Tillman

An order removing appointed counsel cannot be directly appealed because the order is nonfinal but can be raised by the defendant on appeal of the underlying case; additionally, a sanctions order can be directly appealed because it raises serious implications regarding the attorney’s reputation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Allen v. Meyer

A magistrate judge has no jurisdiction to enter a final judgment without the consent of the parties.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Reddam v. CIR

A capital loss tax deduction must have economic substance; and, under the economic substance doctrine, a transaction must not be intended only to create a capital loss with no real expectation of generating income.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Ervine v. Desert View Reg’l Med. Ctr. Holdings

To prove standing under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a party must show a real and immediate threat that he will be subject to a discriminatory act by the defendant; and, under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each discrete and independent discriminatory act causes a claim to accrue and a new limitations period to begin.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Disability Law

Hurles v. Ryan

A remand is appropriate when appellate counsel fails to raise all nonfrivolous issues on appeal, including inadequacy of trial or appellate counsel, and the failure results in actual prejudice; and, a failure to hold an evidentiary hearing is evidence of defective fact-finding and may provide evidence of judicial bias.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

In Defense of Animals v. Dep’t of the Interior

Under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act the BLM has authority to remove horses and burros when their populations exceed previously designated Appropriate Management Levels within Health Management Areas , further if the BLM provides the pertinent information in a convincing report, an environmental impact statement is not required under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Environmental Law

Nevarez v. Barnes

An amended law that requires a reduction of time credits as a consequence of intervening misconduct by an inmate who was previously eligible for time credits does not raise ex post facto issues.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

United States v. Ruiz-Lopez

To uphold a conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, documents within an individual’s official record of prior encounters with immigration enforcement (“A-file”) may provide sufficient evidence of alienage.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

In re: Schwartz-Tallard

Attorneys’ fees incurred by a bankruptcy debtor in defense of a creditor’s appeal of a ruling that the creditor had violated the automatic stay requirement are actual damages recoverable by the debtor.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Gallardo v. United States

In pursuing a Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) action, a plaintiff’s claim accrues when she becomes aware of her injury and its cause, however, equitable tolling of the FTCA’s statute of limitations may be appropriate in some circumstances.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law