United States v. Lindsey, No. 14-10004 (6-28-16)(Gould with Noonan and Friedland).  It was a "wild" time in the mortgage lending field, said defense counsel in his opening.  "Objection," said the prosecutor.  Sustained, ruled the court.  And so it went through the trial. The defense tried to mount a "negligence" defense, and even a recklessness on the part of the secondary lenders, arguing that no one was looking, and even willfully averted eyes.  It doesn't matter, ruled the trial court.  On appeal, after convictions for wire fraud based on lending practices, the 9th affirmed.  The 9th held that negligence and even intentional disregard of information as a defense in mortgage fraud.  The 9th found that the defendant was not denied the right to mount a defense.

The decision is here: 

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/06/28/14-10004.pdf