Opinion ID: 723390
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Relationship with Komoda

Text: 18 The government argues that the district court clearly erred in finding that Komoda had no agency relationship with the two promotions companies, I.V. Promotions and Inaoya Promotions. Because the defendants did not use I.V. Promotions within the two-year limitations period, we do not consider whether the court's finding as to that company was correct. As to Inaoya, the district court's finding is supported by testimony and is not clearly erroneous. See Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573-74 (1985) (If the district court's account of the evidence is plausible in light of the record viewed in its entirety, the court of appeals may not reverse it even though convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.).