DISCLAIMER:  The following unofficial case summaries are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.
131367P.pdf   12/16/2014  Kevin Schriener  v.  Quicken Loans, Inc.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-1367
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Wollman and Murphy, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. Where defendant charged 
   no fee for the preparation of a deed of trust, it did not, under Missouri 
   law, engage in the law business; plaintiff's concession that defendant did 
   not charge him also undermines his unjust-enrichment claim and his claim 
   that defendant violated the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act; no error 
   in denying motion to alter or amend the judgment as plaintiff's proposed 
   amendments to his complaint would have been futile. 
  
133416P.pdf   12/16/2014  Marvin Reeves  v.  Lt. Jacob King
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-3416
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs    
   [PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Colloton and Gruender, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Civil rights. Defendant's action in revealing to other 
   inmates that plaintiff had "snitched" on a prison employee who was 
   bringing illegal drugs into the prison subjected plaintiff to a 
   substantial risk of serious harm at the hands of his fellow inmates; 
   existing case law at the time sufficiently gave defendant fair warning 
   that his alleged actions violated plaintiff's constitutional rights and he 
   was not, therefore, entitled to summary judgment based on qualified 
   immunity on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims. 
  
141249P.pdf   12/16/2014  United States  v.  Christopher Kelley
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1249
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City    
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Smith and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Defendant did not contest the magistrate 
   judge's denial of his motion for substitute counsel by filing an objection 
   with the district court and he waived the issue for appeal; even if the 
   court were to excuse defendant's waiver and review the decision, his 
   complaints about his appointed counsel did not rise to the level of 
   justifiable dissatisfaction, and the magistrate judge did not err in 
   denying the motion; the district court did not err in denying defendant's 
   day-of-trial motion for substitution of counsel; with respect to 
   defendant's claim that the district court erred in denying his request to 
   proceed pro se, it is not clear whether the district court found the 
   request unclear and equivocal or untimely or obstructionist or if the 
   court found defendant could not produce a valid waiver of his right to 
   counsel, and the matter is remanded to permit the district court to 
   clarify its ruling. 
  
141901U.pdf   12/16/2014  William Raymundo-Rodriguez  v.  Eric H. Holder, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1901
   Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bye and Melloy, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Petition for Review - Immigration. Substantial evidence supported the 
   order denying petitioner's request for withholding of removal; 
   specifically, petitioner failed to show a clear probability that his life 
   or freedom would be threatened in Guatemala because of his membership in 
   the particular social group he identified. 
  
141907U.pdf   12/16/2014  James Widtfeldt  v.  James Daugherty
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1907
   U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Bowman and Colloton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case. Order dismissing plaintiff's claim for failure to prosecute 
   was not an abuse of the trial court's discretion when plaintiff failed to 
   show that he had properly effectuated service within 120 days of the 
   filing of his complaint. 
  
142299U.pdf   12/16/2014  United States  v.  Kelly Randall
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2299
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Sioux City    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Bowman and Colloton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court's purported consideration 
   of a factor unrelated to defendant's substantial assistance in determining 
   the extent of his Rule 35(b) reduction was not a reviewable violation of 
   18 U.S.C. Sec. 3742(a), and the appeal is dismissed for lack of 
   jurisdiction.