ORDER

LEE H. ROSENTHAL, District Judge.

Regina Askew has moved for a postverdict judgment of acquittal under Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure on the basis that the verdict was manifestly against the evidence presented at trial. Ms. Askew was convicted of Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The evidence at trial was sufficient to show that viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, a rational jury could have found the defendant guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Ford, 558 F.3d 371, 375 (5th Cir. 2009). The Rule 29 motion, (Docket Entry No. 357), is denied. The motion to extend the time to file the motion, (Docket Entry No. 356), is granted.

Earnest Gibson, III has also moved for a postverdict judgment of acquittal and for a new trial, (Docket Entry No. 351, 388). He also filed an amended supplemental motion for new trial, (Docket Entry No. 388). The amended supplemental motion for new trial makes the earlier supplemental motion for new trial he filed, (Docket Entry No. 353), moot. Because Mr. Gibson III has shown no basis for a new trial or for a judgment of acquittal, the motions are denied.

Earnest Gibson, IV has also moved for judgment of acquittal and for new trial, (Docket Entry No. 350). He has also failed to show a basis for the relief he seeks, and the motion is denied.

Finally, Robert Crane has also moved for a judgment of acquittal and for a new trial, (Docket Entry No. 348 and 349). Like the motions filed by the other defendants, these motions lack a basis in the record or the law, and they are denied.