Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
District of Columbia· 5/12/2003

United States v. Shah

Citations

  • 263 F. Supp. 2d 10
  • 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7938
  • 2003 WL 21087015

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo 28 review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not otherwise.’”
  • “Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo 25 review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not otherwise.’”
  • “Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo 28 review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not otherwise.’”
  • “Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo 25 review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not otherwise.’”
  • “Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo 27 review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not otherwise.’”
  • “Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo 1 || review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not otherwise.’”’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lamberth

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Shah

18 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.