838 F.2d 55 (2d Cir.1988). Let the Clerk send a copy of this Report and Recommendation to the attorneys for the Petitioner and the Respondent. SO ORDERED. Dated: April 23, 3003. 1 . This decision may be cited in whole or in any part. 2 . Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). 3 .Of two African Americans that were prospective jurors, the prosecution exercised a peremptory challenge as to one. Beverly Patterson was not selected but Mr. Lampley was. The prosecution indicated that it did not want Patterson because she was unemployed, aged between thirty and forty, and did not exhibit anything in her background that demonstrated that she made important everyday decisions. 4 . See also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-150, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985) (<HOLDING>); Allen v. Senkowski, 2003 WL 169788, at *1
holding that section 636b1c does not require any review at all by the district court of an issue that is not objected to holding the first condition is not at issue here  all of the other situations require materiality holding that section 704 does not bar district court jurisdiction when the claims court does not provide a special and adequate review procedure for that claim holding that it is error for court of appeals to reverse trial courts ruling that had not been objected to at the trial court level holding that where defendant objected in the district court only to the loss calculation and not specifically to the calculation of restitution the issue of restitution was not properly presented  to the district court