Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Douglas REGA, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-07
Citations: 208 F. App'x 27
Docket Number: No. 05-2524-cr
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Douglas REGA, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: PRESENT: Hon. GUIDO CALABRESI, Hon. ROBERT D. SACK, Circuit Judges, Hon. RICHARD M. BERMAN, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 208
Pages: 27–27

Head Matter:
THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY TO THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Douglas REGA, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 05-2524-cr.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Dec. 7, 2006.
Douglas Rega, pro se, Waymart, PA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Christine Y. Wong and Harry Sandick, Assistant United States Attorneys, for Michael J. Garcia, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, for Defendants-Appellees.
PRESENT: Hon. GUIDO CALABRESI, Hon. ROBERT D. SACK, Circuit Judges, Hon. RICHARD M. BERMAN, District Judge.
The Honorable Richard M. Berman, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Defendant-Appellant Douglas Rega ("Rega") appeals, pro se, the orders of the district court (Koeltl, J.), issued on November 26, 2003, and August 9, 2004, denying Rega's motion for a corrected or reduced sentence pursuant to former Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. We affirm for substantially the reasons given by the district court in its thoughtful orders. Its conclusions were well within the court's ample discretion.
We have considered all of Rega's arguments and find them to be without merit. The decision of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.