Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John A. RADERMACHER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-10-03
Citations: 295 F. App'x 85
Docket Number: No. 07-2234
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John A. RADERMACHER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 295
Pages: 85–86

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John A. RADERMACHER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-2234.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 25, 2008.
Decided Oct. 3, 2008.
John W. Vaudreuil, Office of the United States Attorney, Madison, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Robert T. Ruth, Madison, WI, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge, and DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge.
After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); Cir. R. 34(f).

Opinion:
Order
After a limited remand under United States v. Taylor, 522 F.3d 731 (7th Cir. 2008), the district judge informed us that she would have imposed a lower sentence had she known about the extent of her discretion under Kimbrough v. United States, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 558, 169 L.Ed.2d 481 (2007).
Given this conclusion, the prejudice component of plain-error review has been established. The sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing in light of Kimbrough.