dissenting.

For reasons enunciated in my separate opinion in United States v. Talebnejad, 460 F.3d 563 (4th Cir. 2006), I respectfully dissent. Here, as in Talebnejad, the indictment failed to allege a knowing and willful violation of the Maryland licensing law for activities after October 1, 2002. Because I would hold that the Government must prove a knowing and willful violation of Maryland’s licensing law for conduct occurring after October 1, 2002, I would affirm the dismissal of the indictment.

The United States appeals an order of the district court dismissing the indictment against Luis Felipe Gomez. Gomez was charged with conducting an unlicensed money transmitting business. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 1960 (West Supp. 2006). The district court dismissed the indictment on the basis of its opinion in United States v. Talebnejad, 342 F.Supp.2d 346 (D.Md. 2004). We agree with the district court that this case is in pan materia with Talebnejad. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in our opinion reversing the district court, see United States v. Talebnejad, 460 F.3d 563 (4th Cir. 2006), we reverse the dismissal of the indictment against Gomez and remand for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.