United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Filed: May 20, 2015 No. 13-5368 PRIESTS FOR LIFE, ET AL., APPELLANTS v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL., APPELLEES Consolidated with 13-5371, 14-5021 Appeals from the United States District Court

  United, States, Court, Appeal, United states court of appeals

United States Court of Appeals

Dec 28, 2021 · United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued September 17, 2021 Decided December 28, 2021 No. 20-1190 AT&T SERVICES, INC., PETITIONER v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENTS APPLE INC., ET AL., INTERVENORS Consolidated with 20 …

United States Court of Appeals

united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit argued november 30, 2021 decided december 9, 2021 no. 21-5254 donald j. trump, in his capacity as the 45th president of the united states, appellant v. bennie g. thompson, in his official capacity as chairman of the united states house select committee to investigate the january 6th attack on

  Appeal, Circuit

CIRCUIT RULES of the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS …

Dec 01, 2021 · FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE AND CORRESPONDING CIRCUIT RULES OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Federal Rules Adopted Effective July 1, 1968, As Amended Through December 1, 2021 Circuit Rules Effective January 1, 1994, As Amended Through December 1, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE I. APPLICABILITY …

  Rules, Circuit, Circuit rules

United States Court of Appeals

The district court held the challenged laws do not exceed the District’s authority under local law because they are usual and reasonable police regulations within the meaning of the 1906 Act. 698 F. Supp. 2d 179, 196–97 (2010). Then, addressing

  District, Court, District court

United States Court of Appeals - cadc.uscourts.gov

Later, the United States Sentencing Commission lowered that range and made its amendment retroactive. Smith then moved for a corresponding reduction in his sentence. The district court ruled that a reduced sentence was both legally unavailable and unwarranted. Because, under

  United, States, Commission, United states, Sentencing, United states sentencing commission

United States Court of Appeals

circumstances,” it provides some directional signals: “[T]he term ‘exceptional circumstances’ does not include a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests under this section,

  United, States, Court, Appeal, Circumstances, United states court of appeals

FORMAT OF BRIEFS

Amicus Curiae Briefs Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(4)(D) Statement of Authorship and Financial Contributions Amicus Curiae Briefs Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(4)(E) Summary of Argument All Briefs (Excluding Amicus Curiae's Briefs Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(7) D.C. Cir. Rule 28(a)(6) Fed. R. App. P. 28.1(c) Standing < In cases involving direct review of ...

  Amicus curiae, Amicus, Curiae

United States Court of Appeals - cadc.uscourts.gov

reliable to support a refund.On June 19, 2020, United petitioned for review of the TSA’s denial. We have jurisdiction of United’s petition pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). III. Analysis . United contends that the TSA’s rejection of its refund request was …

  Request, Rejection, Refund, Refund request

Guidance on Redacting Personal Data Identifiers in ...

Guidance on Redacting Personal Data Identifiers in Electronically Filed Documents -5-< Redacting a Scanned File (tiff, jpeg, gif, etc.): This is a little more tricky since you are modifying an "image" or photo of a file and the data which contains that image may not be fully removed or destroyed using common software tools.

  Document, Scanned

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

District of Columbia, 311 F. Supp. 2d 103, 109 (2004). The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, construing his complaint as seeking the right to render a firearm operable and carry it about his home in that condition only when necessary for self-defense, 2. re­ versed, see . Parker. v. District of Columbia, 478 F. 3d 370, 401 ...

  United, States, District, Court, Circuit, Supreme, Supreme court of the united states, Columbia, District of columbia, District of columbia circuit

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Argued March 19, 2018 Decided July 9, 2018 . No. 17-5114 . JEFFERSON MORLEY, APPELLANT. v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, APPELLEE. Appeal from the United States District Court . for the District of Columbia (No. 1:03-cv-02545) James H. Lesar argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant.

  District, Circuit, Columbia, District of columbia, District of columbia circuit

PUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the South Carolina,atDistrict of Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:21-cv-00508-MGL) Argued: January 27, 2022 Decided: February 22, 2022 . Amended: February 23, 2022 . Before KING, THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by published opinion.

  District, Circuit, Columbia, Of columbia

Online Naturalization Records by State - Archives

RR #419 District of Columbia Index to Naturalization Records of the U.S. Supreme Court, 1802–1909, Ancestry Florida Naturalization Records of District Courts in the Southeast, 1790–1958, Ancestry Georgia Naturalization Records of District Courts in the Southeast, 1790–1958, Ancestry Savannah, Georgia, Naturalization Records, 1790–1910, Ancestry

  District, Columbia, Archive, District of columbia

PUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:19-cv-02797-PX) Argued: September 22, 2021 Decided: February 22, 2022 . Before KING, THACKER, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remandedby published opinion. Judge Thacker

  District, Circuit

US BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS …

fnanb/circuit city po box 100018 kennesaw ga 30156 200.93 01‐44312 boggs, danny 1801 w park blvd plano tx 75075 200.93 91‐34904 havins, ray 807 b n i robinson arlington tx 76011 200.98 04‐44174 public leasing 13005 s university ft worth tx 76107 201.00 96‐39305 castle dental po box 848208 dallas tx 75284 201.01 04‐91410

  District, Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

2 . C. ERTIFICATE OF . I. NTERESTED . P. ERSONS. Appellant certifies that the following listed persons and entities as described in the fourth sentence of Rule 28.2.1 have an interest in the outcome of this case.

  United, States, Court, Appeal, Circuit, Fifth, United states court of appeals for the fifth circuit

HEARING LIST

Tuesday, February 22, 2022 No. 20–493. Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, et al. v. Texas. Certiorari to the C. A. 5th Circuit.

  Circuit