PER CURIAM: Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Pascual Samuel Guerrero presents arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir.2001), which rejected a Commerce Clause challenge to the felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), and by United States v. Dancy, 861 F.2d 77, 81-82 (5th Cir.1988), which held that a conviction under § 922(
g) does not require proof that the defendant knew that the firearm had an interstate nexus or that he was a felon. Guerrero also raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Schmidt, 487 F.3d 253, 254-55 (5th Cir.2007), which rejected challenges based on Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600, 114 S.Ct. 1793, 128 L.Ed.2d 608 (1994), and Bryan v. United States, 524 U.S. 184, 118 S.Ct. 1939, 141 L.Ed.2d 197 (1998), to the validity of Dancy. The Government’s motion for
summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under dle limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.