JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge. Ricardo Alvarado was convicted of possessing a firearm as an individual with a felony conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court sentenced him to 104 months’ imprisonment after applying a four-level sentencing enhancement for reckless endangerment. Alvarado appeals both the conviction and sentence. He argues that his conviction violates the Second Amendment under the standard articulated in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), an issue he raises for the first time on appeal, and that the evidence did not support a sentencing enhancement for reckless endangerment. We AFFIRM Alvarado’s conviction but VACATE his sentence and REMAND to the district court for resentencing.

Defendant Matthew Ward, then an off-duty police officer for the City of Decherd, stopped plaintiff Ilya Kovalchuk, waved his police badge, and held Kovalchuk at gunpoint without any justification. Kovalchuk alleges that Ward violated his Fourth Amendment rights and that the City’s failure to investigate Ward’s background before hiring him caused Kovalchuk’s injuries. Finding that Kovalchuk failed to adequately plead allegations supporting municipal liability, the district court dismissed the claims against the City. We affirm.

COLE, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff, Tillman Transportation, LLC, engaged in Trucking Contracts with the defendant, MI Business, Inc. (operating as affiliate companies RDT and RDF). In 2019 and 2020, Tillman and RDT entered into three contracts, where Tillman leased trucks to RDT and transported shipments for RDT. At issue in this case, each contract included binding arbitration clauses. After the contracts terminated, the companies had multiple disputes resulting in this lawsuit and a separate ongoing arbitration.

The defendants moved to compel arbitration, but Tillman argued that Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) exempted it from compulsory arbitration. The district court granted the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, finding that Section 1 did not apply to the agreements’ arbitration clauses because Tillman was a limited liability company in contract with another corporate entity. Tillman appealed the decision. We affirm.