Whether a district court's response of 'You have all the evidence you need to render your verdict' constitutes a plainly improper jury instruction when the jury seeks clarification on the temporal scope of alleged possession

: In this case, there was tria l evidence presented regard ing a bevy of days, times, and different implements in which the accused allegedly possessed firearms, ammunition, or both. Yet, the accu sed was only charge d with possessing specific items on a specific day—Sept ember 8, 2021. Like most charging instruments, the indictment here qualified that date with the familiar “on or about” language. During deliberations, the District Court received a question from the jury that clearly was inquiring how far back in time alleged events of possession were permissible for its consideration—an ob vious question in light of the trial evidence. The District Cour t simply repeated the familiar refrain of “You have all the evidence you need to render your verd ict.” Was this a plainly improper (and plai nly erroneous) response?