United States v. Navarro

Amicus Brief on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers for Defendant-Appellant Seth Fishman

Brief filed: 11/06/2023


United States v. Navarro

2nd Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. No. 22-1600(L)

Prior Decision

Decision below United States v. Navarro, 20−cr−00160, Dkt. No. 887 (S.D.N.Y. July 12, 2022)


The government’s argument of including state racing commissions in the group of those that could be defrauded or misled under the felony provisions of the FDCA is contrary to the law. The Supreme Court has a line of cases making clear that the FDCA was designed to protect consumers from receiving adulterated or impure food and drugs. It was not designed to protect state racing commissions. If the government’s theory – which was accepted by the district court – succeeds, it would substantially extend the breadth of those who could be defrauded under the FCDA in a manner never contemplated by Congress, and could expose individuals unbounded liability without proper notice.


Michael M. Rosensaft and Nicholas J. Liotta., Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP; Lindsay A. Lewis, Vice Chair, Amicus Curiae Committee of the NACDL, Dratel & Lewis.

Explore keywords to find information

Featured Products