Sealed Case, In re, 97-3112
| Decision Date | 03 November 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-3112,97-3112 |
| Citation | 159 F.3d 1362 |
| Parties | , 11 Fed.Sent.R. 119 In re SEALED CASE, |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Before: EDWARDS, Chief Judge; WALD, SILBERMAN, WILLIAMS, GINSBURG, SENTELLE, HENDERSON, RANDOLPH, ROGERS, TATEL and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.
Upon consideration of appellee's Suggestion For Rehearing In Banc, the response thereto, and the vote by a majority of the judges of the court in regular, active service in favor of the suggestion, it is
ORDERED that the suggestion be granted. This case will be reheard by the court sitting in banc. The judgment filed herein on July 24, 1998, is vacated as to Part III of the opinion of that date only. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that oral argument will be heard by the court sitting in banc on Wednesday, January 27, 1999, at 9:30 A.M.
The parties are directed to submit thirty copies each of the briefs and joint appendix previously filed in this case and to do so on or before December 24, 1998. The parties are granted leave to file supplemental briefs of no more than 15 pages limited to authority issued since the date of the panel decision, in accord with the following schedule:
Appellant's Brief November 24, 1998
Appellee's Brief December 16, 1998
Appellant's Reply Brief December 24, 1998
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Abuhouran
...such authority. In re Sealed Case (Sentencing Guidelines' "Substantial Assistance"), 149 F.3d 1198 (D.C.Cir.1998), rehg. granted, 159 F.3d 1362 (D.C.Cir.1998). Although we have previously ruled that a district court has no such authority, see United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d ......
-
Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis PD.
...before the District of Columbia Circuit. See Fraternal Order of Police v. United States, 152 F.3d 998 (D.C. Cir.), reh'g granted, 159 F.3d 1362 (1998), on reh'g, 173 F.3d 898 (1999). Gillespie made no effort to develop this line of attack in the body of his brief, however, and has therefore......
-
U.S. v. Boyd
...925 which was successful in Fraternal Order of Police v. United States, 152 F.3d 998, 1002-03 (D.C.Cir.1998), reh'g granted, 159 F.3d 1362 (D.C.Cir. Nov.12, 1998). The remedy granted in that decision was to hold " § 925 unconstitutional insofar as it purports to withhold the public interest......
-
Fraternal Order of Police v. U.S.
... ... One might also think it "unfair" in a relevant sense to be faced with the risk of losing a case on the basis of an argument that one's adversary failed to raise in the time and space allotted ... ...
-
Examining the Lautenberg Amendment in the civilian and military contexts: congressional overreaching, statutory vagueness, ex post facto violations, and implementational flaws.
...see Fraternal Order of Police v. United States, 981 F. Supp. 1, 4 (D.D.C. 1997), rev'd, 152 F.3d 998 (D.C. Cir), and reh'g granted, 159 F.3d 1362 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (per curiam), and aff'd on reh'g, 173 F.3d 898 (D.C. Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 928 (1999). At the district court level,......