Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Ben Bane

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided June 28, 2013No. 11-14158Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJordan, Circuit Judge

Except as to the discussion and conclusion about the calculation of loss under the Sentencing Guidelines, I join the majority opinion. With respect to loss, the issue is a close one, but on balance I conclude that the special rule set forth in Application Note 3(F)(v)(III) to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 does not apply under the facts presented.

In order to ensure that they have a medical need for portable oxygen, Medicare requires that patients undergo pulse oximetry testing at independent laboratories. Pulse oximetry, “a routine and noninvasive means of testing oxygen levels in the blood,” Doctors…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. BlitzCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  2. United States v. MedinaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007
  3. Allied Orthopedic Appliances Inc. v. Tyco Health Care Group LPCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  4. United States v. KleinCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
  5. Doctors Nursing & Rehabilitation Center v. SebeliusCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API