CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
FAHD SALEH ALBAADANI,
Defendant-Appellant.
   No. 16-6668
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga.
No. 1:16-cr-00065-1—Curtis L. Collier, Chief District Judge.
Decided and Filed: July 13, 2017
Before: DAUGHTREY, MOORE, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Defendant-Appellant Fahd Saleh Albaadani, who was born in Yemen, was sentenced to nine months of imprisonment and one year of supervised release for tampering with a GPS ankle monitor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1361 and 8 U.S.C. § 1253(b). R. 65 (Judgment at 1–3) (Page ID #763–65). Albaadani has appealed, arguing that his sentence was “based . . . on the impermissible factors of Mr. Albaadani’s gender and national origin.” Appellant’s Br. at 20. Although we agree that some of the district court’s comments, taken out of context, could appear to be influenced by Albaadani’s national origin, the district court’s explicit and complete reliance on several serious threats and photographs attributed to Albaadani gives us confidence that the sentence, viewed as a whole, did not create the appearance of having been based on gender or national origin. Therefore, we AFFIRM Albaadani’s sentence.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
TENNESSEE REPUBLICAN PARTY (16-3360); GEORGIA REPUBLICAN PARTY and NEW YORK REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE (16-3732),
Petitioners,
v.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION; MUNICIPAL SECURITIES RULEMAKING BOARD,
Respondents.
   Nos. 16-3360/3732
On Petition for Review to the Securities and Exchange Commission;
No. MSRB-2016-06.
Argued: May 4, 2017
Decided and Filed: July 13, 2017
Before: DAUGHTREY, MOORE, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Petitioners, the Tennessee Republican Party, the Georgia Republican Party, and the New York Republican State Committee, have challenged the legality of amendments to rules (“2016 Amendments”) proposed by Respondent Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB”) and that are “deemed to have been approved by [Respondent Securities and Exchange] Commission” (“SEC”). 15 U.S.C. § 78s(b)(2)(D) (2012). The amendments limit the campaign activities of persons who advise city and state governments on issuing municipal securities. Ultimately, however, we do not reach the merits of this case because Petitioners have failed to establish that they have standing to challenge these amendments. Therefore, we DISMISS the petitions for review of the final rule for lack of jurisdiction. We DENY AS MOOT the SEC’s motion to dismiss and DENY AS MOOT the MSRB’s motion to be designated as an intervenor.