Case ID: f-appx_120/html/0143-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Gale M. RUTH, Jr., Defendant—Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Dean E. Ruth, Defendant—Appellant.
    Nos. 04-30080, 04-30101.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 10, 2005.
    
    Decided Jan. 14, 2005.
    Kris A. McLean, Esq., USMI — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    John P. Rhodes, Esq., FDMT — Federal Defenders of Montana, Dustin Chouinard, Datsopolulos, MacDonald & Lind, Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: BEEZER, HALL and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gale Ruth, Jr. and his uncle Dean E. Ruth appeal the judgments of conviction following their jury trial for conspiracy and violations of the Lacey Act, for acquiring and transporting illegally taken wildlife through interstate commerce.

The Ruths contend that the district court erred by denying their Fed. R.Crim.P. 29(c) motions for acquittal because the government did not prove a required element for a felony violation of the Lacey Act: that the market value of any of the taken wildlife exceeded $350. The Ruths concede that this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Atkinson, 966 F.2d 1270 (9th Cir.1992), but wish to preserve the issue for possible en banc or Supreme Court review.

Accordingly, the district court is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.