Opinion ID: 4458470
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: If There Was Any Error, It Was Harmless

Text: The government introduced more than enough evidence as to use to sustain Kanodia's conviction. Watson testified that he relied on Kanodia's tips to trade. Kanodia sometimes placed phone calls to both men shortly before they traded. Ahmed and Watson invested heavily in Cooper as Kanodia continued to feed them information. Moreover, they bought options that would have proven worthless if Cooper's share price did not jump quickly. And both transferred a combined sum of $242,500 to the LCF account controlled by Kanodia after profiting handsomely on their trades. Although the government opposed Kanodia's requested instruction, it refrained from suggesting that Ahmed and Watson's mere possession of Kanodia's tips sufficed to show Kanodia's culpability. Accordingly, any instructional error did not have a substantial influence on the jury's verdict. 4 Kanodia renews this objection on appeal, but we bypass it. The government argues that the district court instruction was properly based upon the SEC's interpretation of Section 10(b) in Rule 10b5-1 (which the government argues deserves Chevron deference). See Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842-43 (1984). We need not address this issue, because any error was harmless. - 20 -