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.
151841U.pdf   09/23/2016  United States  v.  David Goodwin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-1841
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. On remand from the Supreme Court for further 
   consideration under Mathis v. U.S., 136 S.Ct. 2243 (2016). The government 
   concedes defendant's sentence should be vacated, and the matter is 
   remanded for resentencing. 
  
161014U.pdf   09/23/2016  Gural Foster  v.  Carolyn Colvin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1014
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bowman and Murphy, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Social Security. The district court did nor err in dismissing 
   Foster's complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust his 
   administrative remedies. 
  
161235U.pdf   09/23/2016  Christine Brown  v.  Carolyn Colvin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1235
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Harrison    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Arnold and Gruender, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Social Security. Substantial evidence on the record as a 
   whole supports the denial of benefits; the ALJ adequately accounted for 
   claimant's mental impairments in determining her residual functional 
   capacity. 
  
162251U.pdf   09/23/2016  United States  v.  Eldon Philip Anderson
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-2251
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Arnold and Gruender, Circuit 
   Judges Criminal case - Sentencing. The Sixth Amendment, which grants a 
   defendant the right to counsel, does not apply to 
   revocation-of-supervised-release proceedings;in any event, the district 
   court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant's waiver of his 
   right to counsel.