In a motion for a new trial, how has the court treated the delivery of a written copy of the jury's instructions for use during deliberations?

Rosano argued in his post-trial motion, and now argues on appeal, that the district court erred in providing the jury with a written copy of its instructions for use during deliberations. Our examination of the record reveals that this argument was not raised until the motion for a new trial was made, nearly one month after the jury reached its verdict. Because Rosano failed to object to the delivery of a written copy of the instructions at the time the copy was provided, we review for plain error. See United States v. Delano, 55 F.3d 720, 732 (2d Cir.1995). We think that the delivery of written text to the jury was appropriate in this case and that Rosano "cannot demonstrate any error, let alone surmount the higher plain error standard." Id.

We have considered all the other arguments advanced by Rosano and find no merit in any of them.