eb. 12, 2008). At the time that the Justice Department filed this brief, no Court of Appeals agreed with the Tenth Circuit. At the time, three other Circuits had all issued unanimous rul- ings that crime victims were entitled to reg- ular appellate review. See In re W.R. Huff Asset Mgmt. Co., 409 F.3d 555,

3 The Court in Financial Federation Title & Trust noted that the standard in the Eleventh Circuit is “more narrow and less subjective” than in other Circuits where a multi-factor test is used. Id. at 837. Case 9:08-cv-80994-KAM Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2009 Page 4 of 9 - 5 -

3 The Court in Financial Federation Title & Trust noted that the standard in the Eleventh Circuit is “more narrow and less subjective” than in other Circuits where a multi-factor test is used. Id. at 837. Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 82 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2009 Page 4 of 9 - 5 -

-CY-80119-Marra-Johnson Page 14 majority of the Circuits that restitution under the 1996 MYRA was an incre

inion itself, as described above, but would risk rendering that opinion in even further conflict with the well-reasoned decisions of numerous other Circuits. In particular, the Fourth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits have each adopted a per se rule favoring enforcement of a grand jury subpoena even where a