s. Maxwell is wasting time and money playing whack- a-mole with this Indictment. IL This Indictment Does Not Satisfy Minimal Notice Requirements In Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 117-18 (1974), the United States Supreme Court explained the circumstances in which an indictment simply setting fort

of future prosecutions for the same offense." United States v. Resendiz-Ponce, 549 U.S. 102, 108 (2007) (internal quotation mark omitted) (quoting Hamling, 418 U.S. at 117). "[A]n indictment parroting the language of a federal criminal statute is often sufficient . ." Id. at 109. As a general matter,