Peruta/Richards going en banc

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • krucam

    Ultimate Member
    So, the previous denial of intervention for the AG, by the 3 judge panel, becomes history. This sort of shows the hand of where Chief Judge Thomas is going.

    Reminder that Chief Judge Thomas was the sole dissent in the panel decision.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    It's more complicated. They just granted en banc in Richards!!

    11-16255 Adam Richards, et al v. Ed Prieto, et al "Chambers Order Filed For Publication"

    Docket Text:
    Filed Order for PUBLICATION (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. [9473554] (RP)


    ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    It's more complicated. They just granted en banc in Richards!!

    11-16255 Adam Richards, et al v. Ed Prieto, et al "Chambers Order Filed For Publication"

    Docket Text:
    Filed Order for PUBLICATION (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. [9473554] (RP)


    ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.

    so what's your prediction Esq?
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    And it just keeps on coming. Here is the order just entered in Richards:

    bject: 11-16255 Adam Richards, et al v. Ed Prieto, et al "Order Filed (From Chambers)"
    Docket Text:
    Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) En banc oral argument will take place during the week of June 15, 2015, in San Francisco, California. The date and time will be determined by separate order. For further information or special requests regarding scheduling, please contact Deputy Clerk Paul Keller at paul_keller@ca9.uscourts.gov or (415) 355-8026. Within seven days from the date of this order, the parties shall forward to the Clerk of Court twenty-five additional paper copies of the original briefs (including amicus briefs) and excerpts of record. The paper copies must be accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. A sample certificate is available at http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/uploads/cmecf/Certificate-for-Brief-in- Paper-Format.pdf. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate ECF. [9473785] (WL)


    No such order has been entered in Peruta. If that remains true, then this tells me that they are holding Peruta and will proceed with argument in Richards and then dispose of Peruta after an enbanc decision in Richards. In the meantime, Peruta is kept on ice by the decision to grant en banc. All of this is bad.


    EDIT: Well, they just entered the same order in Peruta. So this will be quite the show. Speaking of show, the 9th Circuit, alone among the circuits (last time I checked), actually video tapes the arguments and puts them on Youtube the next day. Should be fun to watch.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    how long from time of oral argument to a decision typically?

    There is no typical in the 9th. But this will get a priority, as evidenced by the argument date in June. I'd guess (and it is just a guess): six months to decision after argument.
     

    aquaman

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 21, 2008
    7,499
    Belcamp, MD
    I thought this was in the bag and lots of sheriffs were going shall issue in CA

    This stuff is so hard to understand and disappointing. Either we have rights or not, the legal system is a racket
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,917
    Messages
    7,258,650
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom