*1 17 ‐ 165

United States v.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007 IS PERMITTED AND GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

At stated term Appeals Second Circuit, held Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, City 13 th day March, two thousand seventeen.

PRESENT: ROBERT D. SACK,

RAYMOND LOHIER, JR.,

Circuit Judges ,

GREGORY H. WOODS, Judge.*

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

12 13 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

14 Appellee ,

15

16 v. No. ‐ ‐ cr 17

18 DAN ZHONG,

19

20 Defendant Appellant.**

21 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

22

* Gregory Woods, Southern sitting by designation.

** directed amend official caption conform caption above.

FOR APPELLEE: I C. R ICHARDSON (Susan Corkery,

Alexander A. Solomon, Douglas M. Pravda, Nicholas Moscow, on the brief ), Assistant Attorneys, for Robert L. Capers, Attorney for the Eastern District of New Brooklyn, NY. APPELLANT: N ATHANIEL KERMAN (Joshua

Colangelo Bryan, on brief ), Dorsey & Whitney LLP, NY. Appeal from an of District for Eastern York (Dora L. Irizarry, Chief ). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, DECREED Dan appeals from his bail before trial refusal to his bail to consider relating risk flight. assume parties’ familiarity with facts record prior proceedings, which we refer only necessary explain our decision affirm.

Based on our review record, we discern error decision orally deny pending trial ground he represented risk flight. Nor do see any error *3 in hearing provide evidence. referred that and observed that “there is information that . . . exists that was not known movant this case, defendant, time that has material bearing issue whether there are conditions release that will reasonably assure appearance defendant.” have considered remaining arguments conclude they

are without merit. For foregoing reasons, is COURT:

Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe,

[1] Appellant also moves supplement appeal. Because affirm denying bail, hereby denied moot.