The outcomes in Dusenbery and Jones can appear to be contradictory. In Dusenbery, the Court found that the government's delivery of notice to the mail room at the prison where the party to be notified was incarcerated was sufficient, even though the inmate was in the very same government's custody and thus could have been notified in a manner more certain to have reached him. In Jones on the other hand, the government sent notice via certified mail on two separate occasions, efforts that were deemed insufficient given the government's notice of their failure. Are these two cases inconsistent with one another or can they be reconciled? What might explain the seemingly opposed outcomes? Note the change in personnel on the Court between the two rulings