Epstein Secrets

cation decision — that is, how it applied the Rule 23 factors -- is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See, e.g., EQT Prod. Co., 764 F.3d at 357; Ward, 595 F.3d at 179; Monroe v. City of Charlottesville, Va., 579 F.3d 380, 384 (4th Cir. 2009); Gregory v. Finova Capital Corp., 442 F.3d 188, 190 (4th

tration Date. 03/24/2010 Registration Expiration Date: 03/31/2011 Associates Executives: Prior - 2 prior executive(sl found NO. NAME TITLE 1. Mortensen, Tammy DIRECTOR (03/25/1999) 2. Mortensen, Troy L DIRECTOR (03/25/1999) Registered Agents -1 registered agent(s) found NO. NAME ADDRESS ST

therless child of 13 who became the de- fendant's ward. From 1997 to 2001 the defendant engaged in freq

. Meacham, supra, 115 F.3d at 1495.96. We can place the blame for judicial preoccupa- tion with the word "dominant" on the Supreme Court, which in Mortensen v. United States, 322 U.S. 369, 374, 64 S.Ct. 1037, 88 L.Ed. 1331 (1944) , a Mann Act case, said that engaging in forbidden sexual activity "must

rict court selects the sentence arbitrarily, bases the sentence on impermissible factors [or] fails to consider pertinent section 3553(a) factors." Ward. 506 F.3d at 478 (interrhal quotation marks omitted); see also United States I Ausburn. 502 F.3d 313. 328 (3d Cir.2007) (asking if the district co

going determination, it is not necessary to examine the further contention of appellant that the judgment should be versed under authority of of Mortensen United States, 322 U.S. 369, 64 S.Ct. 1 . The judgment is reversed and the caw remanded with directions to enter judg- ment of acquittal. SANBOR