By: Derek Hawkins//February 8, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: United States of America v. Kevin Mark Trudeau
Case No.:14-1869
Officials: EASTERBROOK, ROVNER, and SYKES, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Consumer Protection – Meritless Appeal
Appellant raises numerous issues on appeal to combat civil contempt sanctions and provides meritless arguments.
“Trudeau tries to rescue his waived argument by suggesting it was merely forfeited because any objection in the district court would have been futile in light of Greyhound’s status as binding precedent. Wrong again. Trudeau could have preserved a challenge to the continuing vitality of Greyhound even though the district court would have been bound by that decision. Cf. Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1, 4 (2006) (considering the arguments of a petitioner who preserved her objection to a well-settled jury instruction by objecting to it even though “the trial court, correctly finding itself bound by Circuit precedent, denied petitioner’s request”).
Affirmed