Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in treating the limiting language 'against the person of another' in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) as mere surplusage

QUESTION PRESENTED Where the circuit courts agree that a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) will be sustained even if the defendant was not aware that his conduct would be perceived as intimidating by anyone, is the Ninth Circuit correct to treat the limiting language “against the person of another” in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) as mere surplusage, or must a conviction necessarily establish that a defendant was more than negligent as to whether his intentional conduct could harm another before said conviction can serve as predicate offense for the substantial sentencing enhancements under § 924(c)(1) ? i