Search

Articles

7-24-2017 – 50th Anniversary of California’s Loaded Open Carry Ban

7-12-2017 – Can we Save Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

6-27-2017 – Supreme Court Decides to Wait for Another Second Amendment Case

6/15/2017 – The Evil Practice of Carrying Weapons Secretly

6/6/2017 – NRA Lawyer says Odds are Supreme Court will NOT take Concealed Carry Case

6/2/2017 – The NRA Lost Another Second Amendment Appeal Today

5/29/2017 – Lead Plaintiff in Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal says Courts are Corrupt

5/23/2017 – Peruta Concealed Carry Lawsuit has Waited 2,768 Days – Supreme Court says Wait Longer

5/20/2017 – Second Amendment Case Peruta vs. California May Strike-Out at Supreme Court

5/03/2017 – Did the NRA Take a Dive in its Fake Open Carry Lawsuit?

5/01/2017 – Supreme Court Again Silent on Second Amendment

04/22/2017 – Supreme Court Math and Concealed Carry in Peruta v. California

04/14/2017 – Federal Judge Upholds Nonexistent Gun Ban

04/12/2017 – Concealed Carry, Incest, Gay Marriage and the Supreme Court

04/05/2017 – Justice Neil Gorsuch and the Second Amendment

3/29/2017 – The Next Second Amendment Handgun Carry Case to Go Down in Flames

3/28/2017 – Federal Judge Tells NRA to Put Up or Shut Up in Open Carry Lawsuit

3/22/2017 – Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor Finally Recognizes the Second Amendment

3/13/2017 – Another Second Amendment Appeal Shot-Down by the 9th Circuit

3/10/2017 – US Supreme Court to Decide Concealed Carry Petition in Two Weeks

3/5/2017 – The Florida Supreme Court Just Handed The US Supreme Court a Second Amendment Case It Can’t Refuse

2/23/2017 – California Asks Supreme Court to Wait For Nichols v. Brown Open Carry Appeal

2/15/2017 – NRA Got Spanked for Valentine’s Day!

2/3/2017 – President Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch

1/24/2017 -A Concealed Carry Case SCOTUS Can’t Refuse

1/23/2017 -President Trump’s Judicial Opportunity and Conundrum

1/13/2017 -NRA Tells Supreme Court Open Carry is Perverse

1/11/2017 – NRA Drops Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal

12/30/2016 – NRA Asks US Supreme Court To Hear Two Concealed Carry Lawsuits

12/10/2016 – National Concealed Carry Snake Oil Law Will Fail

11/29/2016 – What Lies Ahead for the Second Amendment?

11/10/2016 – The Second Amendment and President Trump

10/03/2016 – A Federal 9th Circuit Judge Finally Finds a Right to Bear Arms in Public

9/28/2016 – Are You Protected by the Fourth Amendment if You Carry a Firearm?

9/20/2016 – Two Concealed Carry Cases Fire Blanks in U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

9/8/2016 – Another Second Amendment Appeal Crashing and Burning in 9th Circuit

8/24/2016 – Concealed Carry Snake Oil and Kool-Aid Peddlers Leave Town for DC

8/18/2016 – The NRA Files Legal Challenge To California Open Carry Bans – But Not Really

8/17/2016 – The Battle for the Second Amendment Moves to Hawaii

8/15/2016 – There is No Right to Concealed Carry – 9th Circuit Denies Full Court Petitions

8/5/2016 – Did California Lie to 11 Federal Judges in Second Amendment Lawsuits?

7/15/2016 – God Save The US From The Second Amendment Lawyers

7/8/2016 – NRA Segregation Now, Tomorrow, and Forever Position Must Fail

7/4/2016 – Try Recalling California’s Anti-Gun Politicians Before Starting Your Revolution

6/27/2016 – NRA Head Wayne LaPierre Really, Really Hates the Second Amendment

6/24/2016 – Judges Who Uphold Bans on Concealed Carry Are Not the Same as Judges Who Look the Other Way When Police Murder People in the Street

6/15/2016 – Where is the NRA’s California Open Carry Lawsuit?

6/13/2016 – What’s Next for the Right to Carry Firearms in Public?

6/8/2016 – Florida Supreme Court Justices Voice Contempt for the Second Amendment

6/5/2016 – Florida Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Carry Case with National Ramifications

5/17/2016 – The Second Amendment and the Concealed Carry Problem

5/11/2016 – Federal Court of Appeals Goes Berserk During Second Amendment Gun Case Hearing

5/10/2016 – California Supreme Court Shoots Itself In Foot Over Gun Case

4/25/2016 – Second Amendment Foundation Files Another Concealed Carry Lawsuit: May Backfire

4/13/2016 – Has the NRA Come to Bury the Second Amendment or to Defend It? –

4/6/2016 – Second Amendment Must Wait A Bit Longer In 9th Circuit

3/26/2016 – Concealed Carry of Concealable Firearm in a Vehicle Now a Crime of Moral Turpitude

3/21/2016 – Supreme Court decision wasn’t about stun guns – It was about the Second Amendment decision in District of Columbia v. Heller which is bad news for concealed carry

3/7/2016 – How to Stop Anti-Gun Bills in California from Becoming Law

3/3/2016 – The California Supreme Court Case Which Could Upend the Gun-Groups Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/24/2016 – The Second Amendment – Checkmate in Four Moves?

2/10/2016 – Why California’s Waiting Period to Purchase a Firearm Will Be Upheld

2/3/2016 – Florida House of Representatives Passes Handgun Open Carry Bill

1/27/2016 – The NRA Thinks Not Getting Caught In A Lie Is The Same Thing As Telling The Truth

12/11/2015 – Why Were the San Bernardino Shooting Victims Unarmed?

11/20/2015 – Attorney Alan Gura May Have Fumbled Another Second Amendment Case

11/20/2015 – HELP WANTED: Competent Second Amendment Lawyer – Inquire Within

11/9/2015 – The Supreme Court may have Finally Found its Next Second Amendment Case

9/2/2015 – Full Derp Battle over Concealed Carry in District of Columbia

9/1/2015 – National Rifle Association Drops Lawsuit against San Francisco

8/31/2015 – The Future of the Second Amendment in California and Hawaii

8/25/2015 – Yes, America, the Second Amendment is a Universal Right!

8/14/2015 – Will this be the Supreme Court’s Next Second Amendment Case?

7/3/2015 – The Future of Open Carry in California Looks Bright

6/16/2015 – State of California Concedes Second Amendment Extends Outside the Home

6/8/2015 – The Second Amendment is Now in the Hands of these Eleven Judges

6/8/2015 – Supreme Court Won’t Hear Second Amendment Cases Until there is a Circuit Split

5/29/2015 – NRA Opposes Open Carry – NRA Now Takes Credit for New Texas Handgun Open Carry Law

5/26/2015 – Four Years Ago Today: Is Open Carry The Right Guaranteed By The Second Amendment

5/18/2015 – Why the Second Amendment Keeps Losing in Court

5/2/2015 – Black Panther Party Invades California Capitol – 48 Years Ago Today

5/1/2015 – The NRA Rearranges Deck Chairs on the Titanic

4/22/2015 – Chief Judge of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Grants Motion of Lone Voice Defending the Second Amendment Open Carry Right

4/11/2015 – An Open Letter to the Orange County Register’s Editorial on Concealed Carry

4/03/2015 – Another Shoe Drops on the California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/27/2015 – Federal Judge Says No Second Amendment Right To Own Firearms

12/6/2014 – The First Shoe Drops On California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

11/30/2014 – Open Carry Gunfight At The California Corral: Start Of Year Four

11/30/2014 – California Open Carry Gunfight Begins Its Fourth Year

11/12/2014 – California Concealed Carry Permits – The Fat Lady Still Hasn’t Sung in Peruta v. San Diego

10/17/2014 – It may be Legal to Carry a Handgun in the Nation’s Capitol by Christmas

10/3/2014 – Another California Concealed Carry Lawsuit Loses before a Federal Judge

8/18/2014 – District of Columbia asks Court for More Time to Enact New Handgun Carry Ban

8/13/2014 – California Concealed Carry Case Peruta v. San Diego – Poised to Move or Stuck in the Mud?

7/30/2014 – Federal Judge Reluctantly Stays his Ruling in DC Handgun Ban

7/28/2014 – The DC Handgun Carry Decision – Throwing Victory into the Jaws of Defeat

7/26/2014 – Ban on Carrying Firearms in Public is Unconstitutional says DC Judge

7/21/2014 – The non-repeal of D.C., Gun-Control

7/2/2014 – US Supreme Court Still Silent On Second Amendment

6/28/2014 – Federal Judge Says Minorities Barred From Bringing Civil Rights Lawsuits

6/7/2014 – The NRA Supports Open Carry Except When The NRA Opposes Open Carry

6/2/2014 – NRA Lawyer Says California Concealed Carry Decision Likely To Be Overturned

6/1/2014 – NRA leadership Comes Out Of The Closet In Its Opposition To Open Carry

Please
donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the legal fund to restore your
right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click
here to donate to the legal fund

(Credit
or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)


GoFundMe PayPal

Please donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the fight to restore your right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click here to donate.

Piryx

(Credit or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)

BitCoins 1AdtAJfcdBkA777fwtVhmCwSwCKGTFrgGz Press@CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

Peruta v. San Diego Appeal 10-56971

Share

Peruta v. San Diego Appeal 10-56971

Well, both the NRA, its state organization CRPA, SAF and CalGuns.nuts filed petitions to have their cases reheard before all of the active judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  This will delay the issuance of the mandate in both cases by at least one month and perhaps several more months.  The last time around, the (limited) en banc petition was granted on March 26, 2015.  Attorney General Harris filed her petition for a (limited) en banc hearing on November 26, 2014.

That was four months exactly for the decision to be made on whether or not to hear the case before a (limited) en banc panel.




On June 9, 2016, an en banc panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that there is no right to carry a weapon concealed in public.

That decision leaves my lawsuit challenging California’s Open Carry bans as the last carry case standing here in the 9th Circuit as I am the only one who has squarely raised an Open Carry challenge.  NRA lawyer, Chuck Michel, said he is going to file an en banc petition for the limited en banc panel decision of 11 judges to be reheard before all active circuit judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (currently 28 judges).  

He has until the 14th day after the limited en banc panel decision was filed to either file his petition or to file a motion to extend the 14 day deadline.  The limited en banc panel decision was published on June 9th.  June 23rd is the deadline for the NRA to file its petition for an en banc panel rehearing before the full court.  For the en banc petition to be granted, the vote of at least active circuit judges is required.  Once the petition is filed, no vote is taken on granting the petition unless at least one of the active circuit court judges asks for a vote.  If one active circuit court judge calls for a vote then the petition is distributed among all of the active judges.  

I’ll leave it at that for now.  Suffice it to say that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has never granted an en banc petition which asked that the limited en banc decision be reheard by all active judges.  I have not read any reports of what the attorneys for the companion case of Richards v. Prieto intends to do.

 

 




I have noticed that many people are confused as to the procedural posture of this case.  The divided three judge panel in this case was vacated which means as far as the courts are concerned it does not exist and the vacated decision may not be cited in any case in this circuit.

A majority of active judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals voted to take this case en banc.  Given the large number of active judges in this circuit, an en banc panel consists of 11 judges. 

A very important procedural point which everyone seems to have missed is that it isn’t the vacated three judge panel decision which is being reviewed by the en banc court, it is the district court decision in Peruta v. San Diego which is being reviewed.  That is why the question of remand back to the district court is brought up during the en banc oral arguments.

Everyone, including Peruta’s lawyer in the district court (Chuck Michel) thought that this case would be quickly decided but that was before the en banc oral arguments took place in which the California Solicitor General conceded during the en banc oral arguments that the Second Amendment does indeed extend beyond the curtilage of one’s home, but not to concealed carry.

That concession by the California Solicitor General made this case more complicated for the en banc court than it started out to be and no doubt explains some, but not all, of the delay in the en banc court publishing a decision.

Obviously, the death of Justice Scalia no doubt will factor into the decision and be a factor as to when the en banc decision is eventually released.


Both this concealed carry case and the Richards v. Prieto concealed carry case were taken under submission for a decision on June 16, 2015.  There is no deadline on the court for issuing a decision.  A decision could come tomorrow or it could come three years from now.  The parties to the lawsuit are allowed to notify the court that no decision has been reached after nine months but that notification is, for all intents and purposes, meaningless.  

The California Solicitor General Conceded that the Second Amendment “Core Right” Extends Beyond the Home in the En Banc Oral Arguments.

This is a huge victory for the Second Amendment in California.  Whether this concession has any effect on concealed carry remains to be seen as ALL of the parties say that there is no right to carry a weapon concealed in public and if there is no right to concealed carry then it does not matter what restrictions are placed on Open Carry.  If there is no concealed carry right then there is no concealed carry right.  End of story.

The Peruta v. San Diego en banc panel consists of THOMAS , Chief Judge; and PREGERSON, SILVERMAN, GRABER, McKEOWN, W. FLETCHER, PAEZ, CALLAHAN, BEA, N.R. SMITH and OWENS




For the current status of my California Open Carry lawsuit click here.

There is only one lawsuit seeking to restore Loaded Open Carry to California – Nichols v. Brown.
 

NRA Suckers

Full en banc Hearing of Peruta v. San Diego and Richards v. Prieto




 

 

NRA lawyer Chuck Michel predicts Peruta CCW decision will be overturned.

Here is the now vacated, divided three judge panel decision in the case of Peruta v. San Diego.




Update June 23, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today, the NRA filed a petition for a full en banc court rehearing (currently 28 judges).  They know they aren’t going to get it but because of this petition, I will have to file for another stay in my appeal.  Here is the petition.  It is large and so you will probably have to download it locally to read it.  Petition for a Full en banc Court Rehearing – Peruta v. San Diego

Update June 9, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today, an en banc panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that there is no right to carry a weapon concealed in public.

Update May 25, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today, a grammatically incorrect, non-party letter which was sent to “Judge Thomas” and closed with “Do your job and decide this case!” was posted on the Federal docket.  It would seem that the author of the letter does not understand how courts work.  A single judge, even if he is the Chief Judge, does not decide cases.  332 – Letter from David Cherrick to “Judge Thomas”

Update May 16, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks eleven months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been five years and five months since the appeal was filed.  It has been 2397 days since this case was filed!  There is no legitimate excuse for the en banc panel to take this long to render an opinion.

Update April 16, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks ten months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been five years and four months since the appeal was filed.  There is no legitimate excuse for the en banc panel to take this long to render an opinion.

Update March 16, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks nine months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been five years and three months since the appeal was filed.  There is no legitimate excuse for the en banc panel to take this long to render an opinion.

Update February 16, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks eight months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been five years and two months since the appeal was filed.

Update January 16, 2016 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks seven months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been five years and one month since the appeal was filed.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 4,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update December 16, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks six months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been five years and three days since the appeal was filed.

Update November 16, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Today marks five months since the en banc oral arguments took place and the case was taken under submission for a decision.  It has been four years, eleven months and three days since the appeal was filed.

Update October 30, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Nothing new.

Update August 21, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – The author of the latest non-party letter to Judge Pregerson took exception with my critique of his letter and so I told him if he sent a letter to the Clerk of the Court asking that it be withdrawn then I would delete my critique from this website.  He did and therefore I did.

Update July 21, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Keep in mind that the case was taken under submission for a decision by the en banc court on June 16, 2015 at the conclusion of oral arguments.  The 11 en banc judges met in private conference immediately after the oral arguments and voted on what to do with the case.  In the same conference the case was assigned to one of the eleven en banc judges to write a majority opinion.  Once the majority decision is finished, along with any concurrences and/or dissents, the court will publish its decision.  This could take a month or it could take three years.  When it happens it happens and there is nothing we can do to speed up the decision.  After nine months have passed (March 16, 2016) the parties to the lawsuit can send a letter to the court reminding them that a decision has still not been issued and at anytime, the parties can file a writ with Justice Kennedy asking for relief while the appeal is pending.

 




Update July 21, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – As an Amicus in the Peruta appeal I am automatically sent an email from PACER whenever a document is filed.  I did not get a notification by email of this letter sent to the court by a private person addressed to one of the judges on the Peruta panel ->  327 – Letter Supporting Peruta

06/16/2015  325 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO SIDNEY R. THOMAS, HARRY PREGERSON, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, SUSAN P. GRABER, M. MARGARET MCKEOWN, WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, RICHARD A. PAEZ, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN, CARLOS T. BEA, N. RANDY SMITH and JOHN B. OWENS. [9577091] [10-56971, 11-16255] (JO) [Entered: 06/16/2015 05:47 PM]
06/19/2015  326  Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Second Amendment Foundation, Adam Richards and Brett Stewart in 11-16255 citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/19/2015. [9580449] [11-16255, 10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 06/19/2015 07:34 AM]
07/07/2015  327  Lodged non party Bill Stelter letter in support of concealed weapon permits. [9602520] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CW) [Entered: 07/08/2015 10:52 AM]

The following transaction was entered on 06/16/2015 at 5:47:40 PM PDT and filed on 06/16/2015

Case Name: Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Case Number:   10-56971

Docket Text:
ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO SIDNEY R. THOMAS, HARRY PREGERSON, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, SUSAN P. GRABER, M. MARGARET MCKEOWN, WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, RICHARD A. PAEZ, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN, CARLOS T. BEA, N. RANDY SMITH and JOHN B. OWENS. [9577091] [10-56971, 11-16255] (JO)

 

We usually do not know who will sit on a panel until the week before the hearing.  That said, Judges ALEX KOZINSKI, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and PAUL J. WATFORD are scheduled for a hearing in a different courtroom at the very same time that oral arguments are scheduled to end in Peruta.  Couple that with the fact that the judges who sat on a panel are supposed to meet in private conference, after oral argument has completed, and discuss and tentatively vote on the case (at which point the case is assigned to a judge on the panel to write and decision) and given that appellate court hearings seem to stick to very tight schedules, I don’t see how one hearing can begin on time when one or more of the judges are just finishing up from a hearing that just took place, even if that hearing room is just down the hallway.

If I had a Second Amendment case on appeal (come to think of it, I do) I would like to have Judge Kozinski as one of the judges on my panel.  Watford is an Obama appointee and let’s face it, Obama did a much better job at picking liberals than Republicans did at picking conservatives.  Clifton was appointed by Bush 41.  Clifton authored an unpublished decision upholding 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) (barring, among other things, possession of a firearm by anyone adjudicated as a mental defective) in a civil suit brought by a person who is disqualified under same from possessing firearms.  Most troubling is this section from a decision by Clifton in Montana Shooting Sports Ass’n v. Holder, 727 F. 3d 975 – Court of Appeals, 9th (Circuit 2013).

“Finally, plaintiffs have not pursued on appeal any argument that the individual right to bear arms recognized in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008), supports a different result. Even if they had advanced this argument, we have already held that Heller “has absolutely no impact on Stewart’s Commerce Clause holding.” Henry, 688 F.3d at 642”

For a judge to make a conclusion regarding the Second Amendment in a case which did not argue the Second Amendment is simply wrong.  How can he know whether or not there is a valid Second Amendment argument that would have prevailed when none was ever made?

I very much hope that I am wrong about Judge Kozinski not being on the Peruta/Richards en banc panel.



Update June 16, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry – Here are the En Banc oral arguments for Peruta v. San Diego / Richards v. Prieto.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 16,  2015 – Ed Peruta has what appears to be a two man self-styled “news organization” the name of which he specifically chose because he thought its initials spelled “ANUS.”  “ANIS” requested to video today’s en banc hearing and the request was denied.  ANIS just requested the court to reconsider its denial.

I guess that having correctly concluded that he is going to lose, Peruta has decided to poke the court with a stick a couple of times on his way out the door.

The following transaction was entered on 06/16/2015 at 12:12:04 PM PDT and filed on 06/12/2015

Case Name: Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Case Number:   10-56971

Docket Text:
Filed Appellant Edward Peruta request for reconsideration of Court’s 6/12/2015 Order denying application to video/audio record for later broadcast and /or request for appeal . Deficiencies: None. Served on 06/12/2015. [9576206] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA)

And no sooner than my clicking “update” on this page, the request was denied by Chief Judge Thomas:

The following transaction was entered on 06/16/2015 at 12:21:07 PM PDT and filed on 06/16/2015

Case Name: Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Case Number:   10-56971
Document(s): Document(s)

Docket Text:
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Edward Peruta and American News and Information Services, Inc.’s request for reconsideration and/or appeal of this Court’s June 12, 2015 order denying the application to video record for later broadcast the cases captioned above is DENIED. [9576216] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA)

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 8,  2015 – We know now who the judges on the en banc panel are.  This is an interesting mix of judges.  Here are my predictions on how each judge will vote.

 

2015-06-16  3:30 pm  Courtroom 1, 3rd Floor Rm 338, James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse, San Francisco – En Banc
Before: THOMAS , Chief Judge; and PREGERSON, SILVERMAN, GRABER, McKEOWN, W. FLETCHER, PAEZ, CALLAHAN, BEA, N.R. SMITH and OWENS, Circuit Judges
Case No. Title Nature Origin Time / Side
10-56971
11-16255
Edward Peruta v. County of San Diego – An appeal by San Diego County residents in their action challenging the implementation of California statutes governing the licensing of people to carry loaded, concealed weapons in public; consolidated with Richard, 11-16255 for rehearing en banc. [3:09-cv-02371-IEG-BGS] Civil S. CA 30 min

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 3,  2015 – Fox News request to video the hearing for later broadcast has been granted.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 1,  2015 – My motion to participate in oral arguments filed on May 20th was denied today.  The motion to intervene by private attorney Vogler was also denied.  He was granted leave to file an Amicus brief.  I’ve said all along that my motion would likely be denied.  After all, the State of California wasn’t allowed any extra time to argue and what time they will have to argue was left entirely up to the Defendants by order of the court.  If the Defendants hadn’t given them part of their time then the State of California would not be participating in oral arguments.  So why did I file the motion?  The short answer is if you don’t try then you will never know if you would have succeeded.  Whether or not my motion or my Amicus brief, which was granted, had any effect on any of the eleven members of the en banc court remains to be seen.  One thing is certain, ALL of the parties in the case claim that Open Carry can be banned.  If the en banc decision goes beyond the question of concealed carry and holds that Open Carry can be banned then it does so without the fig leaf of impartiality it would have had were I, or someone else, allowed to participate in oral arguments in defense of the Second Amendment Open Carry right.  

The motion to intervene by the state is still pending and will likely still be pending until a decision is published.  If Peruta is remanded back to the district court then the state’s motion becomes moot.

The judges who will hear oral arguments are usually released on the Monday of the week before oral arguments are to take place.  Today, the court released the names of the judges who will hear oral arguments in the cases for the week ending June 12th.  Next Monday, June 8th, we should know the names of the judges who will sit on the en banc panel for Peruta/Richards.

Docket Text:
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Proposed Intervenor Michael Vogler’s motion for leave to intervene is DENIED. Because Mr. Vogler moved to intervene prior to the deadline for submitting amicus briefs, his motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED. [9557040] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM)

Docket Text:
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion of amicus curiae Charles Nichols to participate in oral argument is DENIED. [9557087] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 28,  2015 – It might just be a case of housecleaning discovering that an Amicus brief filed back in February had not been officially ordered as filed by the court but, in any event, the Legal Community Against Violence brief was officially filed today with instructions for them to file 25 paper copies within seven days.

Docket Text:
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [133] submitted by Legal Community Against Violence is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9553559] (TH)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 27,  2015 – C-Span will be filming the en banc hearing.

Docket Text:
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: PA):C-Span applied to video/audio record for later broadcast, the cases captioned above, scheduled to be heard at The James R. Browning, U.S. Courthouse in San Francisco, California, on Tuesday, June 16, 2015. C-Span’s request to video/audio record for later broadcast is GRANTED. C-Span will serve as the pool-feed for all media organizations that submit an application.

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 21,  2015 – Corrected Brief – Proposed Intervenor brief for review and filed Motion to intervene. Submitted by Michael John Vogler was entered on 05/21/2015 at 11:30:04 AM PDT and filed on 05/21/2015.

General Docket
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 10-56971 Docketed: 12/16/2010
Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights
Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Appeal From: U.S. District Court for Southern California, San Diego
Fee Status: Paid
Case Type Information:
     1) civil
     2) private
     3) null
Originating Court Information:
     District: 0974-3 : 3:09-cv-02371-IEG-BGS
     Court Reporter: Frank Joseph Rangus, Official Court Reporter
     Trial Judge: Irma E. Gonzalez, Senior District Judge
     Date Filed: 10/23/2009
     Date Order/Judgment:      Date Order/Judgment EOD:      Date NOA Filed:      Date Rec’d COA:
     12/10/2010      12/10/2010      12/14/2010      12/14/2010

05/20/2015  304  Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart in 11-16255 citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9543489] [11-16255, 10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 05/20/2015 07:04 AM]
05/20/2015  305  Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Edward C. DuMont for Intervenor State of California in 10-56971, Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9544710] [10-56971, 11-16255] (ECD) [Entered: 05/20/2015 02:25 PM]
05/20/2015  306 Added attorney Edward C. DuMont for State of California. [9544735] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/20/2015 02:31 PM]
05/20/2015  307  Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Edward C. DuMont for Intervenor State of California in 10-56971, Attorney Mr. Edward C. DuMont for Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255. [9544774] [10-56971, 11-16255] (ECD) [Entered: 05/20/2015 02:37 PM]
05/20/2015  308  Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AF): The motion of Patrick Missud for leave to file an amicus brief is DENIED. Pursuant to this Court’s prior order, any amicus brief must have been filed within 35 days of the entry of the order granting rehearing en banc. [9545182] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/20/2015 04:52 PM]
05/20/2015  309 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Incorrect ECF filing. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [310]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols in 10-56971, 11-16255 Correspondence: Motion of Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols for Leave to Participate in Oral Argument. Date of service: 05/20/2015 [9545249] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CN) [Entered: 05/20/2015 06:34 PM]
05/20/2015  310  Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols in 10-56971, 11-16255 Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion to participate in oral argument]. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9545505] [10-56971, 11-16255] –[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [309] .] (TL) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:20 AM]
05/21/2015  311 Terminated Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud in 10-56971 and Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud in 11-16255 [9545548] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:34 AM]
05/21/2015  312  Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Yolo and Ed Prieto citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/21/2015. [9545574] [11-16255] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 10-56971. 05/21/2015 by TL] (JAW) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:45 AM]
05/21/2015  313  Submitted (ECF) Intervenor brief for review and filed Motion to intervene. Submitted by Michael John Vogler. Date of service: 05/21/2015. [9545868] [10-56971, 11-16255] (MJV) [Entered: 05/21/2015 11:30 AM]

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 20,  2015 – I’ve often wondered if the Clerks office uses the same guides for ECF filing that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has published online.  From the ECF FAQ “I want to file a request for oral argument. How do I do that?” Answer -> “File a request for oral argument as correspondence to the court (Filing type: File Correspondence to Court).”  “File Correspondence to Court” is a list item from the online ECF GUI.  Well, the clerk deleted my filing but fortunately refiled it as a corrected entry.  Memo to self.  The next time you file a motion asking to participate in oral arguments as an Amicus, file it under “Motion for miscellaneous relief .”  Regardless, the Clerk refiled my Motion to Participate in Oral Arguments.  Hopefully the en banc court will grant my motion but even if it does not (and it likely won’t) my motion gave the en banc court information they wouldn’t have had otherwise, albeit not as much information as the court will have if I am granted leave to participate in oral arguments.

Also, Patrick Missud was officially terminated as an Amicus for some inexplicable reason.  😀

05/20/2015  308  Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AF): The motion of Patrick Missud for leave to file an amicus brief is DENIED. Pursuant to this Court’s prior order, any amicus brief must have been filed within 35 days of the entry of the order granting rehearing en banc. [9545182] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/20/2015 04:52 PM]
05/20/2015  309 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Incorrect ECF filing. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [310]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols in 10-56971, 11-16255 Correspondence: Motion of Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols for Leave to Participate in Oral Argument. Date of service: 05/20/2015 [9545249] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CN) [Entered: 05/20/2015 06:34 PM]
05/20/2015  310  Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols in 10-56971, 11-16255 Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion to participate in oral argument]. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9545505] [10-56971, 11-16255] –[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [309] .] (TL) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:20 AM]
05/21/2015  311 Terminated Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud in 10-56971 and Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud in 11-16255 [9545548] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:34 AM]

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 20,  2015 – 6:50 PM UPDATE – I’ve just filed a motion to participate in oral arguments for Peruta/Richards.  Here’s hoping that my motion is granted.  Even if the motion isn’t granted I have at least given eleven judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals something to consider when asking questions to those participating in oral arguments.  For example, the three judge panel thought that the exemption to “have” a loaded firearm on one’s private residential property meant that one can “carry” a loaded firearm on his private residential property.  Neither did the three judge panel understand that, by default, Open Carry is legal everywhere in the State of California and, by default, concealed carry is illegal everywhere in the State of California.  Here is a link to my Motion to Participate in Oral Arguments.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 20,  2015 – The motion by Patrick Missud mentioned in my May 14, 2015 update has been denied.  As you may recall, in his motion he called for the execution of a half dozen or so Federal judges.  I am certain that these judges are now relived to discover that the motion will not be granted and therefore they will not be executed.  Here is the Order denying motion by Patrick Missud.

Docket Text:
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AF): The motion of Patrick Missud for leave to file an amicus brief is DENIED. Pursuant to this Court’s prior order, any amicus brief must have been filed within 35 days of the entry of the order granting rehearing en banc.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 14,  2015 – There were two developments in the case today.  One was expected the other was not.  The motion for Proposed Intervenor State of California to participate in oral argument was GRANTED.  “The State of California shall share argument time with (1) the County of San Diego and Sheriff Gore and (2) the County of Yolo and Sheriff Prieto, in an amount to be determined by those parties.”  Note that California Attorney General Harris’ motion to intervene in the Peruta case still has not been granted and if the Peruta case is remanded back to the district court I believe that her motion will be denied as moot.  If Peruta is not remanded then I believe that her motion to intervene will be granted, unless the en banc decision is in favor of Peruta, limited to Sheriff Gore and unpublished.

The other development was the filing of a proposed Amicus Brief in which the proposed Amicus, Patrick Missud, appears to be calling for the execution of a half dozen or so Federal judges.  Putting aside that he filed his motion past the deadline and putting aside the fact his motion is unlikely to be granted, it appears that Mr. Missud has misconstrued the meaning of the word Amicus and the meaning of the term Amicus Brief.   Turning to Webster’s online dictionary:

Definition of AMICUS CURIAE

:  one (as a professional person or organization) that is not a party to a particular litigation but that is permitted by the court to advise it in respect to some matter of law that directly affects the case in question

Origin of AMICUS CURIAE

New Latin, literally, friend of the court

First Known Use: 1612
It might just be me but I don’t think calling for the execution of other people, under any circumstance, qualifies as “friendly.”

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 13,  2015 – The Brady Campaign filed a Motion for Clarification on Oral Argument at 4:01 PM.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 12,  2015 – The State of California, with the consent of all plaintiffs and defendants, has filed a Motion for Leave to Participate in Oral Argument.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 8,  2015 – The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has a page dedicated to the Peruta lawsuit.  Although it is not frequently updated and it does not contain links to every document it has been updated to include links to all 15 Amicus briefs filed specifically for the en banc case including my Amicus brief.

Here is a link to the page.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 7,  2015 – Update:  NRA lawyer Paul D. Clement filed his Acknowledgment of hearing notice for the en banc hearing.  Some of you may recall that Mr. Clements was President Bush’s (43) lawyer who argued in District of Columbia v. Heller that, instead of affirming the victory in the DC Court of Appeals that the US Supreme Court should instead remand the case back for further proceedings.  You might also recall that the NRA had tried to scuttle the Heller case and interjected itself into the McDonald case.  Alan Gura accused Peruta of copying his Complaint filed in Richards v. Prieto (formerly Sykes v. McGinness) filed nearly six months later in Peruta v. San Diego.

Attorneys for all of the original plaintiffs/defendants have now filed their hearing notices.  We still do not know if Attorney General Harris will be allowed to intervene and if she is allowed to intervene whether or not she will be allowed to participate in oral arguments and for that matter, we do not know if any of the Amici will be granted time during oral arguments.  The closer we get to the hearing date the less likely that will happen.

Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Paul D. Clement for Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson, Edward Peruta and Amicus Curiae NRA. [9528620] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 11-16255. 05/07/2015 by TL] (PDC)

The lawyer for SAF/CalGuns, Alan Gura, finally got around to filing his Acknowledgment of hearing notice today.  Note that it is dated as being signed on May 1st and this is May 7th.

Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Alan Gura for Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart in 11-16255. [9528175] [11-16255, 10-56971] (AG)

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 6,  2015 – The lawyers for the Sheriffs have filed their hearing notices.  We still do not know who will be arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs.  Presumably Alan Gura will represent the SAF but who the NRA lawyer is at this point is anyone’s guess.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 5,  2015 – There has been more activity in the case:

Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS): The Motion of Proposed Intervenor State of California for leave to file a brief on the merits is GRANTED. The Motion of the Madison Society, Inc., for leave to file an amicus curae brief is GRANTED.

Note that granting the motion by the State to file the brief does not mean that the State of California has been granted Intervenor status.  That decision is still pending.  Update:  I looked beyond the docket text to the actual order which said “The Motion of Proposed Intervenor State of California for leave to file a brief on the merits is GRANTED.”  It would be foolish for the plaintiffs to not also file a motion to file a brief on the merits.  As the en banc case now stands, the only merit briefs filed by the plaintiffs and defendants are the merit briefs filed with the three judge panel.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 4,  2015 – The two motions to intervene made by the State of California (i.e., CA Attorney General Kamala Harris) and private attorney Michael J. Vogler are still pending as is the motion to file a corrected Amicus brief by the Madison Society.  The 25 paper copies of the Amicus briefs which were ordered filed are beginning to arrive.  I just noticed that my Amicus brief in support of neither party and the State of Hawaii’s Amicus brief in support of the Defendants-Appellees were both filed on the same day and were the first two to be filed and distributed to the members of the en banc court.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 1,  2015 – Today, Chief Judge Thomas changed the hearing date to June 16th at 3:30 PM.  There is an advantage to having the case being scheduled last in the day, it is easier for the oral arguments to run long.  Here is a link to the oral arguments calendar.

The Madison Society filed a motion to file a corrected Amicus brief today in lieu of the defective one filed yesterday.  The lawyer, unsurprisingly, forgot to date today’s motion for today.  Here is a link to today’s, late filing -> Amicus by Madison Society and Motion to file Corrected Amicus brief

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 30, 2015 – Today is the last day for Amicus briefs to be filed.  The NRA had indicated in its earlier motion for clarification regarding the deadline for Amicus briefs that several groups wanted to file Amicus briefs in support of Peruta.  That was back on April 3, 2015.  Today marks the filing of the second Amicus brief in support of Peruta.  It remains to be seen how many more are filed by tonight’s 11:59 PM deadline but the first for today is the Amicus Brief by the Governors of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota in support of Peruta.  The brief never mentions Open Carry but the Governor’s do argue for concealed carry and an Amicus in support of a party is a brief in support of the parties legal theory which in this case is that states can ban Open Carry in favor of concealed carry.  Absent from all of their legal citations in the brief is any defense of concealed carry.  All that they have to say about the Bill of Rights is true but the Amici made no attempt to explain why concealed carry is a fundamental right when three US Supreme Court decisions and state court decisions going back 200 years have said that concealed carry is not a right.  This update here on my website will be updated throughout the day as the Amicus briefs are filed.

Update 1:10 PM – The Amicus Brief by the Congress of Racial Equality has been filed in support of Peruta.  The brief makes a good Fourteenth Amendment argument based on race but the Peruta plaintiffs did not challenge California’s concealed carry law based on race.  Furthermore, just because California’s statewide prohibition on concealed carry is unconstitutional given the racist intent behind enacting the 1923 law this does not extend to requiring that permits to carry concealed weapons become shall-issue.  The unconstitutionality of one law does not necessarily make others unconstitutional or constitutional.  If that was their argument then they should have connected the dots.  I suspect that they didn’t connect the dots because there is no legal theory, let alone case law, which allows them to make the leap.

Update 2:30 PM – The Amicus by Alabama and a Number of Other States in support of Peruta has been filed.

Update 5:30 PM – The Amicus by WESTERN STATES SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION Sheriffs was filed at 4:31:08 PM PDT.  The Amicus by Gun Owners of America et al was filed at 5:11:05 PM PDT.  The Amicus by NRA  was filed at 5:13:17 PM PDT.  The Amicus by Everytown for Gun Safety was filed at 5:17:07 PM PDT.

Update 6:00 PM – The Amicus by Madison Society and Motion to file Amicus was filed at  5:53:04 PM PDT.  The Amicus should have been attached to the motion but instead the motion is attached to the Amicus.  This brief is drivel.  It seems to be written by someone whose native language is not English.  I hope the en banc judges give this brief a careful read.  If they do then it will eliminate whatever slim hope Peruta/Richards might have had in winning.

Update 6:10 PM – A presumably corrected version of Amicus by AMICI CURIAE WESTERN STATES SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION was filed at 6:03:19 PM PDT.

Update 6:50 PM –  Intervenor brief for review and filed Motion to file non-standard brief. Submitted by Intervenor – Pending State of California at 6:50:13 PM PDT -> Proposed Intervenor State of California’s Brief on the Merits or Alternatively, brief of Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendants-Appellees.  It will be interesting to see what the court does with this.  If the en banc court had wanted merit briefs beyond what was already filed then it would have asked for them.  This can only be viewed as either a delaying tactic or an act of sheer arrogance.  If the court accepts the filing as a merits brief then it will have to grant the Peruta/Richards Plaintiffs leave to file supplemental merits briefs as well lest it appear biased.

Update 10:05 PM – Well, I just finished reading the Amicus brief submitted by the National Rifle Association. By now, unless you have been living under a rock, you know that the ‪#‎NRA‬ opposes ‪#‎OpenCarry‬. Its Amicus brief in Peruta/Richards was the perfect opportunity to defend Open Carry but instead, the NRA argued:

“[T]he State objects on this ground as well, complaining that enjoining the Counties from refusing to grant concealed carry licenses based on their unconstitutional definition of “good cause” would effectively prevent the California Legislature from remedying the unconstitutionality of its current ban on any carrying by allowing open rather than concealed carry…But California has already made a choice between open and concealed carry by generally barring the former while allowing the latter in some circumstances…”

What the NRA fails to mention is that the Second Amendment prohibits California from choosing concealed carry and banning Open Carry. California may no more constitutionally substitute concealed carry for Open Carry than it can substitute atheism for religion in a First Amendment context.

The NRA argues that California can ban Open Carry if it wants to. So much for its claim that the NRA has always been at the forefront of the fight for Open Carry.

Likewise, the Amicus brief by Gun Owners of America et al does not defend the Second Amendment Open Carry right nor do any of the briefs filed in support of Peruta/Richards.

Update 11:55 PM – Amicus by International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association et al was filed at 11:33:37 PM PDT.  Amicus by NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION et al was filed at 11:49:22 PM PDT.

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 29, 2015 – The League of California Cities filed an Amicus in support of Sheriff Gore.  The Amicus brief was written and filed by the same law firm that Redondo Beach City Attorney Mike Webb hired to defend his gun ban against my lawsuit seeking to overturn it which also happens to be the same law firm that represented Alameda County in the Nordyke v. King gun show case and the same law firm in which former Hermosa Beach mayor and city councilman Patrick “Kit” Bobko is a shareholder.  The law firm is Richards, Watson & Gershon.  Webb and Bobko are both RINOs.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 28, 2015 – The deadline for filing an Amicus brief in opposition or in support of neither party has passed.  The only Amicus briefs to be filed until the deadline will be those in support of Peruta/Richards.  Today, Amici Curiae Pink Pistols, Women Against Gun Control, Inc., and Second Amendment Sisters filed their brief.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 22, 2015 – Things just got a lot more interesting.  A motion to intervene as a Plaintiff was just filed with the consent of the Appellees.  This is also funny because intervention would only be permitted if a number of factors were satisfied and one of those is if the attorneys representing the Peruta plaintiffs were not competently representing him.  Here is a link to the Motion to Intervene.  By consenting to the filing of the motion to intervene, the Peruta lawyers are saying that they did not, and cannot, adequately represent Peruta and his fellow plaintiffs.  This amuses me no end.  I am not certain whom the “Appellees” are at this point.  Normally, as at SCOTUS, the parties before an en banc panel are the Petitioner and the Respondent.  The Petitioner is the equivalent of an Appellant and the Respondent is the equivalent of the Appellee.  In any event it still amuses me, just not as much as it will if the Peruta attorneys are the “Appellees” referred to in the motion to intervene.  UPDATE – I just discovered that the presiding judge over Vogler’s district court lawsuit against Pasadena is Judge S. James Otero, the same judge who presided over my Open Carry lawsuit. Based on the number of court filings (54 since the case was opened on September 23, 2014) it appears that Judge Otero is yanking Mr. Vogler’s chain as well.

04/20/2015  235  Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion of Charles Nichols for leave to file an amicus brief is GRANTED. [9501768] (SM) [Entered: 04/20/2015 02:17 PM]
04/20/2015  236  Filed original and 25 copies of Charles Nichols amicus brief of 15 pages. Served on 04/15/2015. [9502183] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/20/2015 04:50 PM]
04/21/2015  237 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [230] filed by State of Hawaii. (sent to en banc court) [9502771] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/21/2015 10:35 AM]
04/22/2015  238  Filed (ECF) Michael J. Vogler, Esq. Motion to intervene. Date of service: 04/22/2015. [9504505] [10-56971, 11-16255] (MJV) [Entered: 04/22/2015 10:30 AM]

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 20, 2015 – Today, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas issued an Order granting My Motion to file My Amicus Brief in Peruta v. San Diego / Richards v. Prieto.  I am now officially one of the Amici in the case.  

04/20/2015  235  Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion of Charles Nichols for leave to file an amicus brief is GRANTED. [9501768] (SM) [Entered: 04/20/2015 02:17 PM]

 

Update April 17, 2015 – a couple of strange, but expected, things happened with my motion to file an Amicus brief in Peruta v. San Diego. DKT233 indicates no deficiencies.  That part makes since as I filed the original and three paper copies required for a motion pursuant to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure in conjunction with the 9th Circuit Appellate rules.  Had the ECF system allowed me to file electronically then it would have been necessary simply to upload the pdf of the motion with the pdf of the Amicus brief attached.  DKT234 is where it seems to have gone off the rails.  I did not file 17 copies of my Amicus brief as stated in the docket entry, I filed three in accordance with the rules.  Had my motion been granted then I should have been directed to file 25 paper copies as the State of Hawaii was directed to do in DKT231. Finally, my Amicus brief was in regards to Peruta, I made no mention of Richards v. Prieto.  I have no idea what will happen next.

04/16/2015  232 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Charles Nichols. [9500411] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 03:30 PM]
04/16/2015  233  Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Charles Nichols motion to file amicus brief in support of neither party. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/15/2015. [9500416] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 03:33 PM]
04/16/2015  234  Received original and 17 copies of Amicus Curiae – Pending Charles Nichols amicus brief in 15 pages. Served on: 04/15/2015. Major deficiencies: motion to become amicus pending. (sent to en banc court) [9500477] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 03:51 PM]
04/17/2015  231  Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [230] submitted by State of Hawaii is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9499782] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 11:09 AM]

Update April 16, 2015 – Amicus briefs in opposition to Peruta and Amicus briefs in support of neither party are due by 11:59 pm tonight.  So far (10:25 pm), the only one to electronically file an Amicus Brief in opposition is the State of Hawaii Amicus Brief.  My Amicus brief in support of neither party was filed by mail today with the Clerk of the Court at 11:35 am.  Whether or not it makes to the docket remains to be seen.  The deadline for filing all Amicus briefs, with or without consent of all parties is at the end of the month.  The 4/6/2015 Order of the Court was unclear as to whether or not Amicus briefs could be filed without consent (Hawaii being a state doesn’t need consent) of the parties or whether a motion is required if one or both sides withholds its consent.

In any event, you can click on the link to the State of Hawaii Amicus brief.  They sing the same old song titled – “The Second Amendment Does Not Protect a Right to Carry Guns in Public, Openly or Concealed.”  The problem with the Hawaii Amicus brief is the same problem the National Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation and their affiliated groups have.  Hawaii ignores two hundred years of prior precedents in favor of the Open Carry right.  Hawaii also fails to mention that this Circuit has already held that laws passed in the 20th Century do not qualify as “longstanding.”

04/16/2015  230  Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by State of Hawaii. Date of service: 04/16/2015. [9499228] [10-56971, 11-16255] (GDL) [Entered: 04/16/2015 09:00 PM]

Update April 15, 2015 – 

04/15/2015  228  Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Stefan B. Tahmassebi for Amicus Curiae Congress of Racial Equality in 10-56971. Date of service: 04/15/2015. [9496613] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SBT) [Entered: 04/15/2015 12:13 PM]
04/15/2015  229 Added attorney Stefan B. Tahmassebi for Congress of Racial Equality.. [9496757] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 04/15/2015 01:21 PM]

Update April 9, 2015 – There was an amusing Non party letter filed in both the Peruta v. San Diego and Richards v. Prieto cases.  I have nothing against shaking one’s fist at government, even if the author of the letter doesn’t know his left fist from his right fist, but in a court the shaking of one’s fist is futile except where one is certain to win or lose.  Regardless, this letter is a good example of how NOT to influence a court.

04/07/2015  226  Lodged Non-Party Armando Roman letter dated 4/3/15 re: Recent development in case. (casefiles) [9488580] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 04/08/2015 02:46 PM]
04/08/2015  225 Received 25 paper copies of excerpts of record [223] in 8 volumes (Volumes 6-8 UNDER SEAL) filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9488520] (TLH) [Entered: 04/08/2015 02:25 PM]

 

Update April 6, 2015 – Deadline for Amicus briefs set.

04/06/2015  223  Submitted (ECF) excerpts of record. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd and Michelle Laxson in 10-56971, Appellant Calguns Foundation, Inc. in 11-16255. Date of service: 05/24/2011. [9484821] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CDM) [Entered: 04/06/2015 11:58 AM]
04/06/2015  224  Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion for clarification is granted. Any amicus briefs, either pertaining to the merits of the case or the denial of the intervention motion, shall be filed within 35 days of the entry of the order granting rehearing en banc. [9485015] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 04/06/2015 01:27 PM]

Update April 5, 2015 – Peruta v. San Diego & Richards v. Prieto Oral Arguments set for June 15th

WHEN AND WHERE?
The 9th Circuit has voted to rehear Peruta v. San Diego en banc. Oral arguments consolidated with Richards v. Prieto will take place at 3:30 pm on June 16, 2015  in Courtroom 1, 3rd Floor Rm 338, James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse, San Francisco – 30 minutes per side – Peruta and Richards to split 30 minutes. No word as of April 5, 2015 who will be arguing the other side. The denial of AG Harris’ petition to intervene was vacated and so odds are she will be arguing for the other side.

 

WHAT JUDGES WILL SIT ON THE EN BANC PANEL?

9th Circuit Chief Judge Thomas was the dissenting judge in the Peruta three judge panel decision which has now been vacated by a majority vote of the 29 active judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Chief Judge Thomas will preside over the en banc hearing. Ten other active judges will be chosen at random to join the Chief Judge on the en banc panel. Odds are we will not know who those judges are until June 8th. Typically the names of the judges on panels are released to the general public on the Monday of the week preceding argument. I do not know how judges are randomly chosen.

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER ORAL ARGUMENT?
At the conclusion of each day’s argument, the judges on each panel confer on the cases they have heard. Each judge expresses his or her tentative views and votes in reverse order of seniority. The judges reach a tentative decision regarding the disposition of each case and whether it should be in the form of a published opinion. The presiding judge then assigns each case to a judge for the preparation and submission of a disposition.

WHEN WILL THERE BE A DECISION?
We’ve only had one Second Amendment case go before an en banc panel, Nordyke v. King. The first time a three judge panel decision was vacated isn’t of much help because the en banc panel waited for the McDonald v. Chicago decision by SCOTUS. On November 28, 2011 former Chief Judge Kozinski filed an order that the case would again be heard en banc. The timeline was: Argued En Banc March 19, 2012 – Submitted May 24, 2012 – Filed June 1, 2012

If I recall correctly, the reason for the departure from the typical procedure of deciding the case and assigning it to a judge for a majority opinion at the end of the day oral argument takes place was because the case was sent to mediation. The County of Alameda, in the 13th year of litigation, had suddenly discovered that its local ordinance did not prohibit gun shows at the Alameda County Fairgrounds and so Nordyke isn’t much help to us. There is no deadline for a decision in an en banc hearing and it is highly unlikely that AG Harris is going to suddenly discover that “may issue” actually means “shall issue.”

Despite all the procedural BS that has led up to this, I don’t think that a decision from the en banc panel will take long. One need only read Judge Thomas’ dissent in Peruta to understand why?

Quoting Judge Thomas from his dissent in Peruta:

“The majority’s first — and crucial — mistake is to misidentify the “conduct at issue.” Chester, 628 F.3d at 680. The majority frames the question as “whether a responsible, law-abiding citizen has a right under the Second Amendment to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.” This is certainly an important issue, but it is not the question we are called upon to answer. The Plaintiffs are not seeking a general license to carry firearms in public for self-defense — they are seeking a license to carry concealed firearms in public.”

“In sum, employing the analysis prescribed by the Supreme Court, the answer to the historical inquiry is clear: carrying a concealed weapon in public was not understood to be within the scope of the right protected by the Second Amendment at the time of ratification. This conclusion is in accord with Heller’s recognition that there were “longstanding prohibitions” on firearms that were “presumptively lawful,”…and the Supreme Court’s observation in Robertson that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms … is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons,”… See Peterson, 707 F.3d at 1211. Because the right asserted is not protected by the Second Amendment, our inquiry should be at an end: San Diego County’s good cause requirement for a person to carry a concealed weapon in San Diego County is constitutional.”

And like a row of dominoes, as Peruta/Richards falls so fall every other concealed carry case pending before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals or working its way on up. Next in line will be my Open Carry lawsuit, Nichols v. Brown, wherein this comment from Judge Thomas’ dissent will be put to the test:

“Although all the nineteenth-century cases cited by the majority cautioned against restrictions on the open carrying of weapons, none of them — except the discredited, outlier Bliss — suggests that restrictions on carrying concealed weapons implicate the Second Amendment. See Chandler, 1 La.Ann. at 490; Nunn, 1 Ga. at 251; Reid, 1 Ala. at 616-17. And nothing in these cases or Chase’s Blackstone even hints that a restriction on carrying concealed weapons would become invalid if restrictions were placed on open carry. Rather, they suggest that restrictions on concealed carry are always valid, while there are limits to restrictions on open carry.

And what are those restrictions on Open Carry in California? Well, if one lives in an incorporated city or in prohibited places of unincorporated county territory then one cannot carry a loaded firearm, openly or concealed, on any part of his residential property including the curtilage of his home and even extending into one’s house or other structures on his property absent a substantial barrier to entry because the California courts in 1976 interpreted the private property exemption to mean that one can have, but not carry, a loaded firearm on his property. With the possible exception of an antique handgun, one is prohibited from openly carrying a handgun in his motor vehicle. Putting a modern, unloaded handgun inside of a fully enclosed locked container exempts one from the recently enacted ban on openly carrying unloaded handguns but not from the ban on carrying a concealed weapon without a permit as a handgun, even an unloaded one, carried in a container is carried concealed and can only be transported subject to a limited number of statutory exemptions leaving only unloaded long guns to be “carried” in one’s motor vehicle. Step outside of your motor vehicle in an incorporated city with a loaded or unloaded long gun which is not fully encased and you breaking a law.

If one is outside of his motor vehicle in a prohibited area (where the discharge of a firearm is prohibited) in unincorporated county territory then one is limited to the Open Carry of an unloaded long gun, or antique unloaded handgun.

For me to prevail on my Second Amendment challenge, all that is required is for the appellate court to conclude that I have the Second Amendment right to openly carry a loaded flintlock rifle on my porch.

And I did not limit my lawsuit to the Second Amendment.

 

Update April 3, 2015 – More administrative activity, nothing noteworthy:

04/03/2015  221  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion for miscellaneous relief [Clarification on applicable deadline for amicus curiae to file briefs supporting Peruta Appellants]. Date of service: 04/03/2015. [9483124] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 11-16255. 04/03/2015 by TL] (CDM) [Entered: 04/03/2015 10:27 AM]
04/03/2015  222 Received 25 paper copies of Opening brief [13] filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9483202] (TLH) [Entered: 04/03/2015 11:09 AM]

Update April 2, 2015 – Lots of administrative activity, nothing noteworthy:

04/02/2015  202 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [32] filed by Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO and LEAA. (sent to en banc court) [9481499] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 10:04 AM]
04/02/2015  203 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [48] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation. (sent to en banc court) [9481579] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 10:35 AM]
04/02/2015  204 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [17] filed by Congress of Racial Equality. (sent to en banc court) [9481624] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 10:51 AM]
04/02/2015  205 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [24] filed by Independence Institute and ILEETA. (sent to en banc court) [9481647] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:00 AM]
04/02/2015  206 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [20] filed by NRA. (sent to en banc court) [9481684] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:10 AM]
04/02/2015  207 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [28] filed by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart. (sent to en banc court) [9481727] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:23 AM]
04/02/2015  208 Ordered electronic copies of appellants excerpts of record. [9481755] (SOS) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:31 AM]
04/02/2015  209 Received 25 paper copies of Reply brief [66] filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9481765] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:32 AM]
04/02/2015  210 Received 25 paper copies of 28(j) letters [47], [71], [72], [75], [82], [83], [101], [106], [108], [110], [112], [113] (bound together in one volume) filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9481831] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 12:09 PM]
04/02/2015  211 Received 25 paper copies of Errata to Opening brief [42] filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9481856] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 12:25 PM]

 

04/02/2015  212 Received 25 paper copies of Motion to intervene [123] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482133]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:16 PM]
04/02/2015  213 Received 26 paper copies of Reply to appellants’ opposition to motion to intervene [148] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482170] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:27 PM]
04/02/2015  214 Received 25 paper copies of Motion to join State of Caifornia petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc [158], [158] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482213] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:36 PM]
04/02/2015  215 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus motion and brief [134], [134], [134] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Robert T. Doyle. (sent to en banc court) [9482260] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:51 PM]
04/02/2015  216 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [172] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482302] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 03:00 PM]
04/02/2015  217 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [162] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482332] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 03:07 PM]
04/02/2015  218 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [181] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482352] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 03:12 PM]
04/02/2015  219 Received 26 paper copies of Motion to intervene [122], [122] filed by State of California. (sent to en banc court) [9482610] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 04:30 PM]
04/02/2015  220 Received 26 paper copies of Reply to appellant’s opposition to motion to intervene [147] filed by State of California. (sent to en banc court) [9482630] (TLH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 04:40 PM]

Update April 1, 2015 – Peruta v. San Diego and Richards v. Prieto have been consolidated for rehearing en banc.

04/01/2015  200  Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) These appeals are consolidated for rehearing en banc. [9480674] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:38 PM]
04/01/2015  201 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [59] filed by California Peace Officers’ Association, California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Sherrifs’ Association. (sent to en banc court) [9481087] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TLH) [Entered: 04/01/2015 04:44 PM]

Update March 30, 2015 – Nothing significant. Just paper copies of two Amicus briefs filed.

03/30/2015  195 Received 25 paper copies of Answering brief [49] filed by William D. Gore. (for en banc court) [9476926] (TLH) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:45 PM]
03/30/2015  196 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [56] filed by Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, George Gascon, Legal Community Against Violence and Major Cities Chiefs Association. (for en banc court) [9476939] (TLH) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:49 PM]

 

Update March 26, 2015 – The 9th Circuit has voted to rehear the case en banc.  This means the 3 judge opinion is vacated.

03/26/2015  193  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 opinion and order denying motions to intervene shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.[9473535] (RP) [Entered: 03/26/2015 12:53 PM]
03/26/2015  194  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 supplemental and 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. [9473833] (SM) [Entered: 03/26/2015 02:42 PM]

Update February 20, 2015 – The appeal is still in limbo and this isn’t the only “right to carry” case being stonewalled by the 9th Circuit.  There is one case that was filed just after the Heller decision in June of 2008 which is still languishing on appeal.  The Heller case was published by SCOTUS nearly seven years ago in June of 2008.

Update February 2, 2015 – The only thing we know is that unless the en banc coordinator (who also happens to be the new Chief judge) extended the voting period then the voting period has ended.  How long it will take the court to count at most 29 ballots is anyone’s guess.  Part of whatever delay that eventually occurs could be attributable to one or more judges writing a dissent/concurrence to the denial/granting of the en banc petition.  All we can do now is wait.

Update January 14, 2015 – It has now been 21 days since the Simultaneous briefs have been filed on whether or not this case should be reheard en banc which means that the period for the active 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judges to circulate memos on whether or not to rehear the case en banc is over.  Over the next 14 days the 29 active judges will vote on whether or not to rehear the case en banc.  Fifteen judges must vote for an en banc review.  If fewer than 15 judges vote to rehear the case then the decision stands.  If 15 or more judges vote to rehear the case en banc then the Peruta decision is vacated, meaning the Peruta decision cannot be cited in support of any 9th Circuit lawsuit.

Given that the Nordyke v. King case was heard twice before an en banc court, and it involved a far narrower issue (gun shows in government buildings), the odds are overwhelming that this Circuit will vote to rehear the case en banc (before an 11 judge panel including the new Chief judge who was the dissenting judge in the original three judge panel Peruta decision).

Note, the clerk issued an order “filing” the Appellant’s simultaneous brief two days after it was actually filed.  I do not know whether or not that pushes the deadline for voting back two days.  Regardless, the 14 day voting period ends January 30, 2015 at the latest.

Update January 6, 2015 – It has now been two years and one month since oral arguments were heard in Peruta, Richards and Baker.

Update December 26, 2014 – Late on the 24th the Second Amendment Foundation in conjunction with CalGuns.nuts filed a brief opposing an en banc rehearing of Peruta v. San Diego. If you are wondering why the NRA supports intervention and the SAF opposes an en banc rehearing and intervention it is because the chances of the NRA getting to argue the Peruta case before the US Supreme Court is somewhere between slim and none if an en banc rehearing is denied and the decision to exclude California Attorney General Harris from further proceedings stands.

The SAF case on the other hand (Richards v Prieto) can easily proceed to the cert stage of a US Supreme Court appeal. The SAF prefers to be the only one arguing before the US Supreme Court on this matter and this is the simplest way for it to shut out the NRA.  Here is the SAF/CalGuns brief -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brief-of-Adam-Richards-Brett-Stewart-Second-Amendment-Foundation-and-The-Calguns-Foundation-as-Amicus-Curiae-in-Opposition-to-Rehearing-En-banc

 

Update December 29, 2014 – A number of briefs have been filed these past couple of weeks.  And now we wait until January 22nd for a decision on whether or not to hear the case en banc.  If you have a Federal PACER account the briefs can be accessed from this entry.  For those of you without, most of the briefs can be accessed by clicking here.

General Docket
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 10-56971 Docketed: 12/16/2010
Termed: 02/13/2014
Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights
Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Appeal From: U.S. District Court for Southern California, San Diego
Fee Status: Paid
Case Type Information:
     1) civil
     2) private
     3) null
Originating Court Information:
     District: 0974-3 : 3:09-cv-02371-IEG-BGS
     Court Reporter: Frank Joseph Rangus, Official Court Reporter
     Trial Judge: Irma E. Gonzalez, Senior District Judge
     Date Filed: 10/23/2009
     Date Order/Judgment:      Date Order/Judgment EOD:      Date NOA Filed:      Date Rec’d COA:
     12/10/2010      12/10/2010      12/14/2010      12/14/2010

12/23/2014  183  Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [181] submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9360495] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:41 PM]
12/24/2014  184  Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC.; FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, INC.; CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, INC.; PINK PISTOLS; GUN RIGHTS ACROSS AMERICA; LIBERAL GUN OWNERS ASSOCIATION; MADISON SOCIETY, INC.; HAWAII DEFENSE FOUNDATION; FLORIDA CARRY, INC.; ILLINOIS CARRY; KNIFE RIGHTS FOUNDATION, INC.; AND SECOND AMENDMENT PLAINTIFFS OPPOSING REHEARING EN BANC. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9361729] [10-56971] (BAB) [Entered: 12/24/2014 12:02 PM]
12/24/2014  185 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. [9361942] (TLH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 01:57 PM]
12/24/2014  186  Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [184] submitted by Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9361947] (TLH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 02:00 PM]
12/24/2014  187 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Incorrect ECF filing. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [191]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Edward Peruta and Michelle Laxson response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc, Combo PFR Panel and En Banc for panel and en banc rehearing, for panel and en banc rehearing (statistical entry). Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362366]. [10-56971] (CDM) [Entered: 12/24/2014 05:17 PM]
12/24/2014  188  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Edward Peruta and Michelle Laxson response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc, Combo PFR Panel and En Banc for panel and en banc rehearing, for panel and en banc rehearing (statistical entry). Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362396]. [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect content of filing. 12/26/2014 by TL] (CDM) [Entered: 12/24/2014 06:21 PM]
12/24/2014  189  Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Adam Richards, Brett Stewart, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Calguns Foundation, Inc.. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362399] [10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 12/24/2014 06:32 PM]
12/24/2014  191  Submitted (ECF) Supplemental Brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362594] –[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [187] .] (TL) [Entered: 12/26/2014 11:32 AM]
12/26/2014  190  Filed clerk order: The amici brief [189] submitted by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart is filed. No paper copies required per the Court’s 12/3/14 order. [9362541] (GV) [Entered: 12/26/2014 10:58 AM]
12/26/2014  192  Filed clerk order: The supplemental brief [191] submitted by Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta is filed. No paper copies required per the Court’s 12/3/14 order. [9362627] (GV) [Entered: 12/26/2014 11:59 AM]

 

Update December 24, 2014 – A Today is the deadline for the parties in the lawsuit and Amici to file their briefs “setting forth their respective positions on whether this case should be reheard en banc.”  As of 11:15 AM today the Peruta plaintiffs have yet to file their brief.

Notably absent today from the Amici who filed earlier Amicus briefs in support of Peruta are:

The Independence Institute
Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership
Law Enforcement Alliance of America
Congress of Racial Equality Inc
National Rifle Association* (The NRA is funding this lawsuit).
International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association
Second Amendment Foundation
CalGuns Foundation
Gun Owners of California Senator H. L. Richardson (Ret.) 

Amicus briefs are relatively inexpensive to file.  In this particular case even cheaper given that the Court instructed the Amici not to file paper copies which could have amounted to 20 or more paper copies being filed.

As you can see below, the anti-gun Amici have not been shy about filing briefs in response to the December 3rd, Order of the court.

Update 3:09 PM  – I have below posted the full Peruta v. San Diego Federal Court docket which reflects Amicus briefs filed by:

Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC.; FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, INC.; CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, INC.; PINK PISTOLS; GUN RIGHTS ACROSS AMERICA; LIBERAL GUN OWNERS ASSOCIATION; MADISON SOCIETY, INC.; HAWAII DEFENSE FOUNDATION; FLORIDA CARRY, INC.; ILLINOIS CARRY; KNIFE RIGHTS FOUNDATION, INC.; AND SECOND AMENDMENT PLAINTIFFS OPPOSING REHEARING EN BANC. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9361729] [10-56971] (BAB) [Entered: 12/24/2014 12:02 PM]

Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. [9361942] (TLH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 01:57 PM] -> Peruta-v.-San-Diego_Brief-of-Amici-Curiae-Firearms-Policy-Coalition-Inc-et-al-Opposing-Rehearing-En-Banc

Update 5:20 PM:

12/24/2014  187  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Edward Peruta and Michelle Laxson response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc, Combo PFR Panel and En Banc for panel and en banc rehearing, for panel and en banc rehearing (statistical entry). Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362366]. [10-56971] (CDM) [Entered: 12/24/2014 05:17 PM]

Update 5:35 PM – The Appellants (Peruta plaintiffs) just now filed their opposition.  Talk about waiting until the last minute -> Peruta_Appellants-Opposition-to-Sua-Sponte-Rehearing-En-Banc

Update 6:48 PM – The Appellants (Peruta plaintiffs) have now filed their response to intervention -> Peruta_-Appellants-Response-to-Petition-for-Rehearing-or-Rehearing-En-Banc-Regarding-Intervention

 

 

Update December 23, 2014 – A corrected brief was filed today by San Diego Sheriff Gore -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Appellee-William-D-Gores-Brief-in-Support-of-Rehearing-En-Banc-Correct-Brief

And the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence brief in support of an en banc rehearing was filed today -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brief-of-Amicus-Curiae-The-Law-Center-to-Prevent-Gun-Violence-in-Support-of-Rehearing-En-Banc

Update December 22, 2014 – The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed an Amicus Brief today -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brief-of-Amicus-Curiae-Brady-Center-to-Prevent-Gun-Violence-in-Support-of-Rehearing-En-Banc  The arguments made in the brief are for the most part pretty weak which is to be expected from a brief submitted by Kool-Aid drinkers.  

Update December 22, 2014 [5:38 pm] – A second Amicus brief was filed today, this time a joint brief by the California Police Chiefs’ Association and the California Peace Officers’ Association -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brief-in-Support-of-Rehearing-En-Banc-by-Amici-Curiae-California-Police-Chiefs-Association-and-California-Peace-Officers-Association

The joint Amicus brief of the California Police Chiefs’ Association and the California Peace Officers’ Association cites the denial of my preliminary injunction by judge Otero seven times and yet fails to mention that my appeal of that decision was dismissed as moot and fails to mention that I am appealing the Rule 12 dismissal of prejudice of my lawsuit.
Only Heller and Peruta were cited more often in their brief.
The Brady Center makes the same citation once in a footnote, the rest of the Amici are silent.
Given that judge Otero created his own “Framework” in which he held a gun law must be invalid in all circumstances pursuant to Salerno and, if not, is subject to rational basis review (something no other Federal appellate court has done) I really don’t seen the logic of their citing that decision given that it is so clearly a fringe decision.
I’m not complaining mind you.  The more often my case is cited in the Peruta briefs the more likely my motions for an initial en banc appeal and alignment with Peruta will be read by someone other than a clerk.
FYI, the opening line of the CPCA/CPOA Amicus Brief addresses itself to Chief Judge Kozinski.  I guess they didn’t get the memo that Kozinski is no longer the Chief Judge?

Update December 18, 2014 – A corrected version was filed today of the Amicus Brief in support of an en banc rehearing in Peruta v. San Diego filed yesterday -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brief-of-Amici-Curiae-Sheriff-Ed-Prieto-and-County-of-Yolo-in-Support-of-Rehearing-En-Banc1[1]

Update December 17, 2014 – The Sheriff of Yolo County (the defendant in Richards v. Prieto) filed an Amicus Brief in support of an en banc rehearing in Peruta v. San Diego -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brief-of-Amici-Curiae-Sheriff-Ed-Prieto-and-County-of-Yolo-in-Support-of-Rehearing-En-Banc[1]

Update December 9, 2014 – The Amicus Brief filed yesterday is submitted.

12/09/2014  163  ENTRY UPDATED. Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [162] submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 20 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9342774] –[Edited 12/09/2014 by TLH to correct number of copies] (TLH) [Entered: 12/09/2014 02:59 PM]

Update December 8, 2014 – An Amicus Brief, no doubt one of many that will be filed, was filed today by the Brady Bunch’s Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

12/08/2014  162  Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/08/2014. [9341224] [10-56971] (SJF) [Entered: 12/08/2014 04:03 PM]

Update December 3, 2014 (6:00 pm) – A judge has finally called for an en banc vote.  The parties are ordered to file within 21 days their positions on whether or not the case should be reheard en banc.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, THOMAS, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
A judge of this Court having made a sua sponte call for a vote on whether
this case should be reheard en banc, the parties shall file, within 21 days from the
date of this order, simultaneous briefs setting forth their respective positions on
whether this case should be reheard en banc. See G.O. 5.4(c)(3). Amici curiae
wishing to file briefs regarding whether this case should be reheard en banc may
also do so within 21 days from the date of this order.
Parties who are registered for ECF should file the brief electronically
without submission of paper copies. Parties who are not registered ECF filers
should submit the original brief plus 50 paper copies.

Update December 3, 2014 – An Order was published today which pretty much guarantees that there will NOT be any resolution in Peruta this year:

“Plaintiff-Appellants are directed to file a response to Proposed IntervenorAppellee’s
petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc filed with this Court on
November 26, 2014. The response shall not exceed thirty-five (35) pages, and
shall be filed within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order.”

 

Update November 26, 2014 – Attorney General Harris today filed a Petition for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc.  The Brady Bunch is reportedly filing their own petition today as well is here -> Peruta-v-San-Diego_Brady-Campaign-To-Prevent-Gun-Violences-Motion-to-Join-Petition-for-Rehearing-With-Suggestion-of-Rehearing-En-Banc-Filed-on-Behalf-of-the-St.

11/12/2014  156  Filed Order for PUBLICATION (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) (Dissent by Judge Thomas) We must rule on motions to intervene in this Second Amendment case which were filed after our opinion and judgment reversing the District Court were filed. (SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT) The State of California’s Motion to Intervene is DENIED. The Brady Campaign’s Motion for Leave to Intervene is DENIED. CPCA and CPOA’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc, construed as a motion to intervene, is DENIED. [9308663] (RP) [Entered: 11/12/2014 06:58 AM]
11/26/2014  157  Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc (from 11/12/2014 opinion). Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329047] [10-56971] (GDB) [Entered: 11/26/2014 04:17 PM]
11/26/2014  158  Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion to join State of California petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc]. Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329149] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect content of filing. 11/28/2014 by TL] (JC) [Entered: 11/26/2014 04:56 PM]
11/26/2014  159  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion to extend time to comply with the order dated 03/27/2014. Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329171] [10-56971] (CDM) [Entered: 11/26/2014 05:18 PM]

Update November 20, 2014 (12:22 AM) – The motion to stay my case by Attorney General Harris strongly suggests that she believes that the only route left for her to attack the Peruta decision is via the Richards v. Prieto appeal or for the Court of Appeals to call for an en banc hearing on its own.  Seven days post denial of the motions to intervene have now passed.  The mandate in Peruta can be issued at any time.  Attorney General Harris has not filed any motions regarding the mandate or the denial of her motion to intervene and her motion for a rehearing.  There are now 14 days remaining for a non-panel judge to make what is known as a 5.4(b) notice request for an en banc hearing.  Within the next 14 days any non-panel judge can “stop the clock” for a lone 14 day extension of time.  If that doesn’t happen then it may be time to stick the procedural fork in Peruta. This is the simplified version.  For a more detailed en banc procedure guide, click here.  For an en banc procedure flowchart, click here.

Update November 12, 2014 – The Motions to intervene in the Peruta case were denied.  The Order can be read here.  I am of the opinion that this can still be appealed via the Peruta case but if it can’t, the Peruta decision can still be appealed indirectly via the Richard’s v. Prieto and Baker v. Kealoha cases and, of course, the Peruta opinion can be appealed indirectly through my case Nichols v. Brown should the Court of Appeals decide that Peruta bars asking for the relief I sought in my lawsuit.  Regardless, somebody is going to be filing a cert petition with SCOTUS before all is said and done in this case.

Edit: Having now read the Order this line pretty much guarantees that the Peruta decision will not bar my succeeding in my Open Carry appeal.

“That the opinion engages in analysis and interpretation of California statutes does not change that the only “objection” raised and decided is the exercise of authority under such statutes, not the statutes themselves.”

11/12/2014  156  Filed Order for PUBLICATION (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) (Dissent by Judge Thomas) We must rule on motions to intervene in this Second Amendment case which were filed after our opinion and judgment reversing the District Court were filed. (SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT) The State of California’s Motion to Intervene is DENIED. The Brady Campaign’s Motion for Leave to Intervene is DENIED. CPCA and CPOA’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc, construed as a motion to intervene, is DENIED. [9308663] (RP) [Entered: 11/12/2014 06:58 AM]

Update November 8, 2014 – I think we will see some movement in the Peruta case by early next year.  Granted this is pure speculation but an informed speculation. Why?  There is a concealed carry case on appeal called James Rothery, et al. v. County of Sacramento, et al., No. 09-16852 in which both sides filed a motion asking to stay the case until 90 days after the mandate in Peruta is issued.  Normally, joint motions for a stay are routinely granted but not this time.  The Clerk of the Court of Appeals granted a limited stay until December 30, 2014.  The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is a court insider and an integral one at that.  Other than the three clerks who work directly for each of the three judges on the Peruta panel, if anyone has an idea of when a decision on the Peruta en banc petition is going to be made it is her.

The stay was issued three weeks before I filed my 30 day extension.  If neither side in my case filed for an automatic 30 day extension then my appeal would have been fully briefed.  I would like to think that the Court of Appeals is waiting for my Open Carry case to be briefed before making a decision in Peruta’s concealed carry case but that would be uninformed speculation.  😀

Update November 5, 2014 – I’ve updated the Federal docket located at the end of this page.

Update October 14, 2014 – It has been 10 months since the Peruta decision was published and five months since there was any activity in the case.  We are still waiting for Attorney General Harris’ motion to intervene to be decided coupled with a decision on whether or not to grant the en banc petition.  Peruta created an intra-circuit split with the US v. Chovan decision (not to mention a split with every other circuit).  SCOTUS denied Chovan’s cert petition which leaves Chovan as the prior precedent subsequent three judge panels like the Peruta Court must follow.

Update September 5, 2014 – It has been another month without any activity in this case other than one of the government lawyers retired.

Update August 5, 2014 – It has been over five months since Attorney General Harris filed her motion to intervene and for an en banc rehearing.  It has been nearly three months since there has been any activity in this case.

Update June 27, 2014 – It took 4 months and 1 day to grant the final en banc petition in Nordyke v. King (the gun show case) which included a six day extension granted to one of the parties to file a brief. It has now been four months since AG Harris filed her motion to intervene/en banc petition in this case.

Update June 13, 2014 – It has been four months since the Peruta decision was published.  Not only has the decision not gone into effect, we are still waiting for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether or not California Attorney General Harris can intervene in the appeal and file a petition for an en banc rehearing.  Four months ago there were a couple of lawyers and a cavalcade of clowns proclaiming that the decision immediately goes into effect and the decision applies state-wide.  Curiously, the one concealed carry lawyer not dancing for joy was Peruta’s own attorney, Chuck Michel, who presumably had bothered to take the time to read the decision and realized that the path those two judges on the Peruta panel chose to give him his “victory” will very likely result in the Peruta decision being overturned.

Update May 28, 2014 – It has been two weeks since Sheriff Gore responded to the court Order of May 1st in which he informed the court that this case is not moot and that Attorney General Harris is the proper person to intervene in the appeal.

Update May 14, 2014 – It seems that Alan Gura’s little ploy to get the Peruta decision declared moot may have backfired.  Sheriff Gore responded to the May 1st Order of the Court in which he took the position that Attorney General Harris is the proper person to intervene and that the case is not moot because his CCW policy has not changed.

05/14/2014  153  Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore response to Court order dated 05/01/2014. Date of service: 05/14/2014. [9095344] (JC)

Update May 1, 2014 – It seems that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was not amused by San Diego Sheriff Gore’s failure to file a response.  Today the court ordered him to:

“Appellee William D. Gore is ordered to notify this Court in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order of his position on the pending motions to intervene or that he takes no position.  Appellee William D. Gore is further ordered to respond within fourteen days of the date of this order to the suggestion that this case is moot. See Opp’n to Pet. for Reh’g En Banc 16, Richards v. Prieto, No. 11-16255 (“Even were Peruta vacated tomorrow, neither this Court nor the state could do anything to keep Gore from printing permits to all otherwise-qualified comers. The Peruta dispute is moot.”). He shall explain any change in his policy that could affect this Court’s jurisdiction over this case.”

So much for the perceived mutual admiration society between SAF and the NRA.  When I read Alan Gura’s opposition to the petition for a rehearing in Richards the quote from above stuck out like a sore thumb.  The SAF, having failed to obtain a published, binding precedent in its case tried to torpedo the NRA case by suggesting to the court that they render the Peruta decision moot.

If the court renders the Peruta decision moot, vacates its decision and depublishes it then it prohibits the Peruta decision from being cited in any future case.

“The “normal rule” when a case is mooted is that vacatur of the lower court decision is appropriate. Camreta v. Greene, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct. 2020, 2035, 179 L.Ed.2d 1118 (2011). That is the default approach because it “prevent[s] a judgment, unreviewable because of mootness, from spawning any legal consequences.” United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 41, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).” American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada v. Masto, 670 F. 3d 1046 – Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit (2012) at 1062.

“Under Article III of the Constitution, federal “courts may adjudicate only actual, ongoing cases or controversies.” Lewis v. Cont’l Bank Corp., 494 1062*1062 U.S. 472, 477, 110 S.Ct. 1249, 108 L.Ed.2d 400 (1990). A live controversy requires an injury in fact, traceable to the defendant’s acts and redressable by a court decision. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-561, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). The case or controversy must continue through all stages of federal judicial proceedings. United States v. Juvenile Male, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct. 2860, 2864, 180 L.Ed.2d 811 (2011) (per curiam). When the possibility of injury to the plaintiffs ceases, the case is rendered moot and we lack jurisdiction to decide it. Rosemere Neighborhood Ass’n v. EPA, 581 F.3d 1169, 1172-73 (9th Cir.2009). Even if the parties do not raise mootness as an issue, “federal courts are required sua sponte to examine jurisdictional issues.” B.C. v. Plumas Unified Sch. Dist., 192 F.3d 1260, 1264 (9th Cir.1999).” Id. at 1065.

05/01/2014  152  Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellee William D. Gore is ordered to notify this Court in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order of his position on the pending motions to intervene or that he takes no position. Appellee William D. Gore is further ordered to respond within fourteen days of the date of this order to the suggestion that this case is moot. See Opp’n to Pet. for Reh’g En Banc 16, Richards v. Prieto, No. 11-16255 (“Even were Peruta vacated tomorrow, neither this Court nor the state could do anything to keep Gore from printing permits to all otherwise-qualified comers. The Peruta dispute is moot.”). He shall explain any change in his policy that could affect this Court’s jurisdiction over this case. [9078973] (WL)

Update April 29, 2014 – I don’t know why but the same Amicus letter from April 17th was filed again today.

04/28/2014  151  Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer letter dated 04/10/2014 re: The judicial reasons for submitting opposition(PANEL). Paper filing deficiency: None. [9075848] (JFF)

Update April 17, 2014 – An Amicus letter was filed today.

04/17/2014  150  Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer letter dated 04/10/2014 re: it is time for the Supreme Court to resolve this 2nd amendment issue. Paper filing deficiency: None. [9062526] (PANEL) (EL)

Update April 4, 2014 – Instead of filing electronically, Sheriff Gore’s attorney mailed the 9th CCA Clerk a letter dated April 1st saying his client has directed him not to file anything further.

04/03/2014  149  Filed Appellee William D. Gore letter dated 04/01/2014 re: Client has directed csl to not file anything further on appeal. No response regarding motions to intervene will be filed. Letter was submitted in paper format rather than ECF. PANEL . Paper filing deficiency: None. [9044210] (CW)

Update April 2, 2014 – California Attorney General Kamala Harris filed her Reply Brief to the Peruta non-Opposition Opposition Brief to intervene.  The Brady Campaign filed its Reply Brief to the Peruta Opposition Brief.

04/02/2014  147  Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California reply to response (, ,motion to intervene). Date of service: 04/02/2014. [9042130]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected reply (includes certificate of service). Resent NDA. 04/02/2014 by RY] (CK)
04/02/2014  148  Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence reply to response (,motion to intervene, ). Date of service: 04/02/2014. [9042383] (NRO)

Update March 27, 2014 (8:07pm) – Despite the order directing “ALL PARTIES” to file a brief it looks like Sheriff Gore decided not to file one.  In any event, there was some minor activity on today’s docket:

03/27/2014  146  Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request is GRANTED. The deadline is extended until thirty days after the latest of: (1) the denial of all pending motions to intervene, (2) the denial of any properly filed petition for rehearing en banc, or (3) the filing of a disposition by an en banc panel. [9034369] (WL)

Update March 27, 2014 (1:07am) – Still no brief from San Diego Sheriff Gore.

03/27/2014  146  Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request is GRANTED. The deadline is extended until thirty days after the latest of: (1) the denial of all pending motions to intervene, (2) the denial of any properly filed petition for rehearing en banc, or (3) the filing of a disposition by an en banc panel. [9034369] (WL)

Update March 26, 2014 (11:06pm) –  Today was the due date for the briefs responding to the motions to intervene.  The first to appear is from the CRPA. Here is a link to the brief.

Update March 24, 2014 – Here is the latest activity on the Federal docket.  You will need a Federal PACER account to access the individual court filings.

03/06/2014  137 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle. [9004425] (RL)
03/11/2014  138  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion for miscellaneous relief [Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request; Declaration of Sean A. Brady In Support Thereof]. Date of service: 03/11/2014. [9011001] (CDM)
03/12/2014  139  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Appellants Response to Appellees Counsel Listing in Published Opinion. Date of service: 03/12/2014 [9013284] (CDM)
03/13/2014  140  Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore Correspondence: Response re: request to correct published opinion. Date of service: 03/13/2014 [9015117] (JC)
03/14/2014  141 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [141]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer response to Party Case , Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) motion to become amicus, Notice of Appearance (ECF Filing) , Corporate Disclosure Statement (ECF Filing). Date of service: 03/14/2014. [9016119]. (AJM)
03/14/2014  142  Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer. Date of service: 03/14/2014. (COURT-ENTERED Filing to replace incorrect entry by filer [141]). [9017247] (ASW)
03/17/2014  143  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta response opposing motion (,motion to become amicus). Date of service: 03/17/2014. [9019487] (CDM)
03/20/2014  144  Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence and Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle reply to response (, ). Date of service: 03/20/2014. [9024303] (SJF)

Update March 18, 2014 – There has been some activity since my last update.  Notably, a private attorney not representing any of the parties filed an Amicus Brief opposing an en banc review (Dkt #141 below).  Peruta filed an opposition to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Sheriff Robert Doyle against their entering the case as Amici (Dkt #143 below).  Ironically, the same Federal Rules cited in the Peruta brief also apply to the NRA/CRPA which improperly filed a motion to become an Amicus in the appeal of the denial of my preliminary injunction in my Open Carry lawsuit.  Apparently, the NRA/CRPA believes it is entitled to violate the Federal Rules whereas others may not.

03/06/2014  137 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle. [9004425] (RL)
03/11/2014  138  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion for miscellaneous relief [Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request; Declaration of Sean A. Brady In Support Thereof]. Date of service: 03/11/2014. [9011001] (CDM)
03/12/2014  139  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Appellants Response to Appellees Counsel Listing in Published Opinion. Date of service: 03/12/2014 [9013284] (CDM)
03/13/2014  140  Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore Correspondence: Response re: request to correct published opinion. Date of service: 03/13/2014 [9015117] (JC)
03/14/2014  141 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [141]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer response to Party Case , Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) motion to become amicus, Notice of Appearance (ECF Filing) , Corporate Disclosure Statement (ECF Filing). Date of service: 03/14/2014. [9016119]. (AJM)
03/14/2014  142  Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer. Date of service: 03/14/2014. (COURT-ENTERED Filing to replace incorrect entry by filer [141]). [9017247] (ASW)
03/17/2014  143  Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta response opposing motion (,motion to become amicus). Date of service: 03/17/2014. [9019487] (CDM)

Update March 5, 2014 – The Peruta en banc procedure has begun a few days earlier than I expected. The Court has approved a former 9th CCA law clerk to represent Attorney General Harris and the Court has has ordered:

“Each party is each directed to file a response of no more than 6,000 words addressing the pending motions to intervene filed with this Court on February 27, 2014. Each response shall address:
1) Motion to Intervene by the State of California, 2) Motion for Leave to Intervene by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and 3) Petition for Rehearing En Banc by Amici Curiae California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association insofar as the Petition is a motion to intervene. See p. 2, n.2. The responses shall be filed within 21 days of this order.”

Is anyone really surprised?

P.S. Chovan filed a petition for an en banc rehearing back on the 18th and, unlike Peruta, the court still has not requested any response.

Update February 28, 2014 – The 9th CCA stayed the issuance of the Mandate in Peruta which means the decision does not go into effect for now.  Two other groups have filed motions to intervene and for petitions to rehear the case en banc – The Brady Campaign (part1, part2) and the LCAV.

Update February 27, 2014 – 1 – Having read AG Harris’ petition for an en banc review, I am now of the opinion that it is very, very likely that the petition will be granted.  If the petition is granted, it presents an excellent opportunity for me to petition the en banc panel to hear my Open Carry appeal at the same time thereby saving me and the courts a lot of time and money.

Update February 27, 2014 – California Attorney General Kamala Harris has today filed a motion to intervene for the purpose of filing a petition for an en banc review of the three judge panel ruling published on February 13, 2014.  Here is a link to the petition. Here is a link to the AG’s Press Release.

The California Peace Officers Association and California Police Chiefs Association also filed a petition for rehearing en banc.  Here is a link.




 

If, as expected, the en banc vote is successful then the Peruta v. San Diego decision is vacated and not to be cited anywhere in the 9th Circuit.  Also, “After the en banc court is chosen, the judges on the panel decide whether there will be oral argument or additional briefing. If there is to be oral argument, the Chief Judge (or the next senior active judge as the case may be) will enter an order designating the date, time and place of argument. If no oral argument is to be heard, the Chief Judge will designate a date, time, and place for a conference of the en banc court. That date will ordinarily be the submission date of the case. If any issues have been isolated for specific attention, the order may also set forth those issues and additional briefing may be ordered.”  (from CIRCUIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOTE TO RULES 35‑1 TO 35‑3)

 The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has a page dedicated to the Peruta appeal.  Keep in mind it does not reflect all activity in the appeal.




What is the en banc time frame?

First of all, the en banc coordinator can compress or expand the time frame as he deems fit.  The en banc coordinator is, coincidentally, the 9th Circuit Chief judge and the dissenting vote in Peruta v. San Diego.  That said, this is what we can expect:

1.  A Circuit Court judge made a sua sponte call for an en banc hearing on December 3, 2014.

2.  The parties have been given 21 days to file simultaneous briefs on whether or not their should be an en banc hearing.  December 24, 2014 is the deadline for filing their briefs.

3.  Amici also have the same deadline for filing their briefs.

4.  Pursuant to General Order 5.5(a) Any judge may circulate memoranda in response to an en banc call within 21 days after the conclusion of all supplemental briefing by parties pursuant to G.O. 5.4.c.2 and .3.  This brings us to January 14, 2015.

5.  Pursuant to General Order 5.5(b) When the exchange of memoranda has been completed, the en banc coordinator shall notify all active judges to vote. No judge shall circulate further correspondence on the case after that notice. A judge’s failure to vote shall be considered a “no” vote. Unless otherwise ordered, each judge shall cast a vote within 14 days of the notice to vote. A judge may change his or her vote if accomplished prior to the expiration of the voting period. Upon the expiration of the voting period, the en banc coordinator shall notify the judges of the result and the vote tally.  This brings us to January 28, 2015.  Note, the Clerk of the Court issued an order on December 26th that the Appellant’s supplemental brief is filed.  The Appellant’s filed their supplemental brief on December 24th.  This might shift the due date for a decision on an en banc hearing back two days.  The new voting cut off date would be January 30, 2014.  There is likely to be one or more dissents regardless of which way the vote goes.  Depending upon the number and length of the dissents, we might not know the result of the vote until the dissents are finished as the dissents are included with the order granting/denying the en banc petition.

6.  Pursuant to General Order 5.5(c) If the call fails to obtain a majority, the panel shall resume control of the case and no further en banc action is required.

7.  Pursuant to General Order 5.5(d) If a majority of the judges eligible to vote on the en banc call votes in favor of en banc consideration, the Chief Judge shall enter an order taking the case en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court. (Rev. 1/27/04)




 

From the date of the filing of the Supplemental briefs it is supposed to take five weeks (35 days) to exchange memos and vote,.  This is the simplified version.  Looking back at the last en banc grant of a Second Amendment case (Nordyke v. King) the last brief in support/opposition to the en banc petition was ordered filed on July 19, 2011 but the Order granting the petition was not issued until November 28, 2011 which was a period of 132 days.  There is one significant difference between the two cases.  There wasn’t a sua sponte call from an active judge on the court of appeals for an en banc vote in the Nordyke case, in Peruta there was a sua sponte call from a judge.  Let us hope that it doesn’t take the 9th Circuit 100 days to count at most 29 votes.

By the way, the order granting the petition to take the Nordyke case en banc did not have a dissent attached.

The General Orders for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals can be found here -> General Orders – 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the rules for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals can be found here -> http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/rules/

Also, keep in mind that the mandate in Peruta is stayed while the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decides whether or not to grant the en banc petitions.  Peruta does not become final (go into effect) until the mandate is issued.  If the en banc petitions are granted then the Peruta decision is vacated (no longer exists) and the ultimate decision by the en banc court is controlling.  It could take five or six months before the court decides whether or not to hold an en banc hearing and another five or six months after that for the en banc court to issue its decision.  That time estimate is based on the last Nordyke v. King en banc hearing.  There is no time limit on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to issue a decision, either by a 3 judge panel of by an en banc panel or by the full court.

Most of the briefs filed in the Peruta case, both district court and appellate, are available for a free download by clicking here.




 

The granting of a petition for an en banc hearing is rare.  For the status of pending en banc cases click here.  Far more common is the grant of a petition for rehearing before the original 3 judge panel.  These cases are often disposed of by withdrawing the original decision and replacing it with a decision agreeable to all three judges.  I don’t see that happening in the Peruta/Richards/Baker cases but it is a possibility.  I was right about the three judge panel denying a petition for a rehearing.

My spot check of times between the filing of a petition for rehearing and the denial of the petition shows that the times vary widely, typically between one and three months.

Here is a flowchart of the en banc appeal process.  As of May 28, 2014 Peruta, Richards and Baker are still in the initial top “blue box.”  Technically, Attorney General Harris has filed a motion to intervene and a petition for rehearing due to the procedural quirks of this case (the defendant stop defending his case).  It is likely that once having granted the motion to intervene, the 9th CCA will grant the petition for rehearing.  If the petition is denied, AG Harris can (and most likely will) file a cert petition with SCOTUS.  Given that the petition is filed by an Attorney General, the odds of the cert petition being granted substantially increases.  As of December 24, 2014 the Peruta case is in the “green box” near the top of the flowchart (a non-panel judge made a 5.4(b) notice request for an en banc hearing), the Richards case has filed a motion to lift the stay and the Baker case is still stayed.

As long as it has now taken for a decision on the motions and petitions, one would think that judges are paid by the hour.  And if the en banc petition is granted, which is likely, we still have months of briefing, oral arguments, and a wait for a decision from the en banc panel to look forward to.




 

Here is a link to the rules of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  Relevant excerpts include:

FRAP 35. EN BANC DETERMINATION
(a)
When Hearing or Rehearing En Banc May Be Ordered. A majority of the circuit judges who are in regular active service and who are not disqualified may order that an appeal or other proceeding be heard or reheard by the court of appeals en banc. An en banc hearing or rehearing is not favored and ordinarily will not be ordered unless:
(1)
en banc consideration is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the court’s decisions; or
(2)
the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance.
(b)
Petition for Hearing or Rehearing En Banc. A party may petition for a hearing or rehearing en banc.
(1)
The petition must begin with a statement that either:
(A)
the panel decision conflicts with a decision of the United States Supreme Court or of the court to which the petition is addressed (with citation to the conflicting case or cases) and consideration by the full court is therefore necessary to secure and maintain uniformity of the court’s decisions; or
(B)
the proceeding involves one or more questions of exceptional importance, each of which must be concisely stated; for example, a petition may assert that a proceeding presents a question of exceptional importance if it involves an issue on which the panel decision conflicts with the authoritative decisions of other United States Courts of Appeals that have addressed the issue.
(2)
Except by the court’s permission, a petition for an en banc hearing or rehearing must not exceed 15 pages, excluding material not counted under Rule 32.
(3)
For purposes of the page limit in Rule 35(b)(2), if a party files both a petition for panel rehearing and a petition for rehearing en banc, they are considered a single document even if they are filed separately, unless separate filing is required by local rule.
(c)
Time for Petition for Hearing or Rehearing En Banc. A petition that an appeal be heard initially en banc must be filed by the date when the appellee’s brief is due. A petition for a rehearing en banc must be filed within the time prescribed by Rule 40 for filing a petition for rehearing.
(d)
Number of Copies. The number of copies to be filed must be prescribed by local rule and may be altered by order in a particular case.
(e)
Response. No response may be filed to a petition for an en banc consideration unless the court orders a response.
(f)
Call for a Vote. A vote need not be taken to determine whether the case will be heard or reheard en banc unless a judge calls for a vote.
(As amended Apr. 1, 1979, eff. Aug. 1, 1979; Dec. 1, 1994; May 11, 1998, eff. Dec. 1, 1998.)
CIRCUIT RULE 35-1. PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
Where a petition for rehearing en banc is made pursuant to FRAP 35(b) in conjunction with a petition for panel rehearing, a reference to the petition for rehearing en banc, as well as to the petition for panel rehearing, shall appear on the cover of the petition. (Rev. 12/1/09)
When the opinion of a panel directly conflicts with an existing opinion by another court of appeals and substantially affects a rule of national application in which there is an overriding need for national uniformity, the existence of such conflict is an appropriate ground for petitioning for rehearing en banc. (Rev. 12/1/09)

CIRCUIT RULE 35-2. OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND
Where a party petitions for hearing or rehearing en banc, the Court will not order a hearing or rehearing en banc without giving the other parties an opportunity to express their views whether hearing or rehearing en banc is appropriate. Where no petition for en banc review is filed, the Court will not ordinarily order a hearing or rehearing en banc without giving counsel an opportunity to respond on the appropriateness of such a hearing. (Rev. 12/1/09)

CIRCUIT RULE 35-3. LIMITED EN BANC COURT
The en banc court, for each case or group of related cases taken en banc, shall consist of the Chief Judge of this circuit and 10 additional judges to be drawn by lot from the active judges of the Court. In the absence of the Chief Judge, an 11th active judge shall be drawn by lot, and the most senior active judge on the panel shall preside. (Rev. 1/1/06, 7/1/07)
The drawing of the en banc court will be performed by the Clerk or a deputy clerk of the Court in the presence of at least one judge and shall take place on the first working day following the date of the order taking the case or group of related cases en banc.
If a judge whose name is drawn for a particular en banc court is disqualified, recused, or knows that he or she will be unable to sit at the time and place designated for the en banc case or cases, the judge will immediately notify the Chief Judge who will direct the Clerk to draw a replacement judge by lot. (Rev. 1/1/06)
In appropriate cases, the Court may order a rehearing by the full court following a hearing or rehearing en banc.
Cross Reference:
CIRCUIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOTE TO RULES 35‑1 TO 35‑3
(1)
Calculation of Filing Deadline. Litigants are reminded that a petition for rehearing en banc must be received by the clerk in San Francisco on the due date. See FRAP 25(a)(1) and (2)(A) and Circuit Rule 25-2; see also United States v. James, 146 F.3d 1183 (9th Cir. 1998). (Rev. 12/1/02; 12/1/09; 1/1/12)
(2)
Petition for Rehearing En Banc. When the clerk receives a timely petition for rehearing en banc, copies are sent to all active judges. If the panel grants rehearing it so advises the other members of the Court, and the petition for rehearing en banc is deemed rejected without prejudice to its renewal after the panel completes action on the rehearing. Cases are rarely reheard en banc.If no petition for rehearing en banc has been submitted and the panel votes to deny rehearing an order to that effect will be prepared and filed.If a petition for rehearing en banc has been made, any judge may, within 21 days from receipt of the en banc petition, request the panel to make known its recommendation as to en banc consideration. Upon receipt of the panel’s recommendation, any judge has 14 days to call for en banc consideration, whereupon a vote will be taken. If no judge requests or gives notice of an intention to request en banc consideration within 21 days of the receipt of the en banc petition, the panel will enter an order denying rehearing and rejecting the petition for rehearing en banc.Any active judge who is not recused or disqualified and who entered upon active service before the request for an en banc vote is eligible to vote. A judge who takes senior status after a call for a vote may not vote or be drawn to serve on the en banc court. This rule is subject to two exceptions: (1) a judge who takes senior status during the pendency of an en banc case for which the judge has already been chosen as a member of the en banc court may continue to serve on that court until the case is finally disposed of; and (2) a senior judge may elect to be eligible, in the same manner as an active judge, to be selected as a member of the en banc court when it reviews a decision of a panel of which the judge was a member.The En Banc Coordinator notifies the judges when voting is complete. If the recommendation or request fails of a majority, the En Banc Coordinator notifies the judges and the panel resumes control of the case. The panel then enters an appropriate order denying en banc consideration. The order will not specify the vote tally.
(3)
Grant of Rehearing En Banc. When the Court votes to rehear a matter en banc, the Chief Judge will enter an order so indicating. The vote tally is not communicated to the parties. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this Court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court. (Rev. 1/1/00)After the en banc court is chosen, the judges on the panel decide whether there will be oral argument or additional briefing. If there is to be oral argument, the Chief Judge (or the next senior active judge as the case may be) will enter an order designating the date, time and place of argument. If no oral argument is to be heard, the Chief Judge will designate a date, time, and place for a conference of the en banc court. That date will ordinarily be the submission date of the case. If any issues have been isolated for specific attention, the order may also set forth those issues and additional briefing may be ordered. (Rev. 1/03; 12/1/09)
Cross Reference:

 

You will need a PACER account to click on the links below

General Docket
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 10-56971 Docketed: 12/16/2010
Termed: 02/13/2014
Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights
Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Appeal From: U.S. District Court for Southern California, San Diego
Fee Status: Paid
Case Type Information:
     1) civil
     2) private
     3) null
Originating Court Information:
     District: 0974-3 : 3:09-cv-02371-IEG-BGS
     Court Reporter: Frank Joseph Rangus, Official Court Reporter
     Trial Judge: Irma E. Gonzalez, Senior District Judge
     Date Filed: 10/23/2009
     Date Order/Judgment:      Date Order/Judgment EOD:      Date NOA Filed:      Date Rec’d COA:
     12/10/2010      12/10/2010      12/14/2010      12/14/2010
Prior Cases:
     None
Current Cases:
Lead Member Start End
     Docketing Link Only
10-56971 11-16255 06/20/2011
     Related
09-16852 11-16255 05/19/2011

 

EDWARD PERUTA
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Paul Neuharth, Jr. APC
102
Firm: 619-231-0401
1140 Union St.
San Diego, CA 92101Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR NTC Retained]
Bancroft PLLC
Suite 470
1919 M Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
Michel & Associates, P.C.
Suite 200
180 E. Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
MICHELLE LAXSON
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
JAMES DODD
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
LESLIE BUNCHER, Dr.
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
MARK CLEARY
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Intervenor – Pending,
Gregory David Brown, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGCA – OFFICE OF THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004Ross Moody, Deputy Attorney General
Direct: 415-703-1376
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGCA – OFFICE OF THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Suite 11000
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
   v.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Defendant – Appellee,
James Chapin, Esquire, Senior Deputy County Counsel
Direct: 619-531-5244
[COR NTC County Counsel]
Office of County Counsel
355
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
WILLIAM D. GORE, individually and in his capacity as Sheriff
Defendant – Appellee,
James Chapin, Esquire, Senior Deputy County Counsel
Direct: 619-531-5244
[COR NTC County Counsel]
(see above)
——————————
CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY
Amicus Curiae,
Stephen Porter Halbrook, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Retained]
3925 Chain Bridge Road
Fairfax, VA 22030
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Paul D. Clement
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
ALLAN JEROME MAYER, Attorney
Amicus Curiae – Pending,
Allan Jerome Mayer, Attorney
Direct: 805/544-7081
[NTC Pro Se]
1650 El Cerrito Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATORS AND TRAINERS ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
David Kopel
Direct: 303-279-6536
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Independence Institute
Firm: 303-279-6536
727 East 16th Avenue
Denver, CO 80203
ROBERT T. DOYLE, Marin County Sheriff
Amicus Curiae – Pending,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 415-591-7052
[COR NTC Retained]
Covington & Burling, LLP
35th Floor
One Front Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5356
INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE
Amicus Curiae,
David Kopel
Direct: 303-279-6536
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Gura & Possessky, PLLC
suite # 305
105 Oronoco Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
CALGUNS FOUNDATION, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
ADAM RICHARDS
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
BRETT STEWART
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE
Amicus Curiae,
John C. Eastman
Direct: 714-628-2587
[COR LD NTC Retained]
THE CLAREMONT INSTITUTE CENTER FOR
CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE
c/o Chapman Univ. School of Law
One University Drive
Orange, CA 92866
DOCTORS FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP
Amicus Curiae,
John C. Eastman
Direct: 714-628-2587
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE OF AMERICA
Amicus Curiae,
John C. Eastman
Direct: 714-628-2587
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
THE GUN OWNERS OF CALIFORNIA
Amicus Curiae,
Don Kates
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Michel & Associates, P.C.
Suite 200
180 E. Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
H. L. RICHARDSON, Senator (Retired)
Amicus Curiae,
Don Kates
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Amicus Curiae,
Neil R. O’Hanlon, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 310-785-4660
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Hogan Lovells US LLP
Suite 1400
1999 Avenue of the Stars
Los Angeles, CA 90067Kathryn Linde Marshall
Direct: 202-637-5771
[COR NTC Retained]
Hogan Lovells US LLP
Firm: 202-637-5600
555 Thirteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF POLICE OFFICERS
Amicus Curiae,
Neil R. O’Hanlon, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 310-785-4660
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
POLICE FOUNDATION
Amicus Curiae,
Neil R. O’Hanlon, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 310-785-4660
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LEGAL COMMUNITY AGAINST VIOLENCE
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 415-591-7052
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
MAJOR CITIES CHIEFS ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 415-591-7052
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
ASSOCIATION OF PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 415-591-7052
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
GEORGE GASCON, San Francisco District Attorney
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 415-591-7052
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
CALIFORNIA SHERRIFS’ ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Paul R. Coble, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 714-446-1400
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Jones & Mayer
3777 N. Harbor Boulevard
Fullerton, CA 92835
LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 415-591-7052
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
EDWARD G. PRIETO, Sheriff
Amicus Curiae,
John A. Whitesides, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 916-564-6100
[COR LD NTC Retained]
ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF
150
Firm: (916) 5646100
601 University Avenue
Suite 150
Sacramento, CA 95825
COUNTY OF YOLO
Amicus Curiae,
John A. Whitesides, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 916-564-6100
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
STATE OF HAWAII
Amicus Curiae,
Girard Douglas Lau, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General
[COR LD NTC State Atty General]
AGHI – OFFICE OF THE HAWAII ATTORNEY GENERAL
Firm: 808-568-1180
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96813Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry
Direct: 808-586-1360
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGHI – OFFICE OF THE HAWAII ATTORNEY GENERAL
Firm: 808-568-1180
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96813Robert Tadao Nakatsuji, Esquire
Direct: 808-586-1360
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGHI – OFFICE OF THE HAWAII ATTORNEY GENERAL
Firm: 808-568-1180
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Terminated: 12/23/2014
Amicus Curiae,
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS’ ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Paul R. Coble, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 714-446-1400
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Martin Joel Mayer
Direct: 714-446-1440
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Jones & Mayer
3777 N. Harbor Boulevard
Fullerton, CA 92835
CALIFORNIA PEACE OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Paul R. Coble, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 714-446-1400
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Martin Joel Mayer
Direct: 714-446-1440
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC., FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, INC.; CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, INC.; PINK PISTOLS; GUN RIGHTS ACROSS AMERICA; LIBERAL GUN OWNERS ASSOCIATION; MADISON SOCIETY, INC.; HAWAII DEFENSE FOUNDATION; FLORIDA CARRY, INC.; ILLINOIS CARRY; KNIFE RIGHTS FOUNDATION, INC.; and SECOND AMENDMENT PLAINTIFFS
Amicus Curiae,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Benbrook Law Group
Suite # 1610
400 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, CA 95814

EDWARD PERUTA; MICHELLE LAXSON; JAMES DODD; LESLIE BUNCHER, Dr.; MARK CLEARY; CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION,Plaintiffs – Appellants,STATE OF CALIFORNIA,Intervenor – Pending,v.COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; WILLIAM D. GORE, individually and in his capacity as Sheriff,Defendants – Appellees.

12/16/2010  1 Added attorney Paul Neuharth Jr. for California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation Edward Peruta Mark Cleary Leslie Buncher Michelle Laxson James Dodd, in case 10-56971. [7582396] (GR) [Entered: 12/16/2010 08:11 AM]
12/16/2010  2 
15 pg, 688.23 KB
DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Mediation Questionnaire due on 12/23/2010. Transcript ordered by 01/13/2011. Transcript due 02/14/2011. Appellant Leslie Buncher, Appellant California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Appellant Mark Cleary, Appellant James Dodd, Appellant Michelle Laxson and Appellant Edward Peruta opening brief due 03/24/2011. Appellee County of San Diego and Appellee William D. Gore answering brief due 04/25/2011. Appellant’s optional reply brief is due 14 days after service of the answering brief. [7582398] (GR) [Entered: 12/16/2010 08:13 AM]
12/16/2010  3 
3 pg, 46.84 KB
Filed representation notice [7582404] (GR) [Entered: 12/16/2010 08:28 AM]
12/17/2010  4 
3 pg, 44.04 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 12/17/2010. [7584873] (CDM) [Entered: 12/17/2010 02:04 PM]
01/03/2011  5 
5 pg, 50.71 KB
Filed order MEDIATION (EPM): The Mediation Program of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals facilitates settlement while appeals are pending. See Fed. R. App. P. 33 and Ninth Cir. R. 33-1. The court has scheduled a telephone settlement assessment conference, with counsel only, on January 31, 2011, at 2:00 p.m. PACIFIC (San Francisco) Time to discuss whether this case is appropriate for participation in the Mediation Program. [7597952] (WL) [Entered: 01/03/2011 03:08 PM]
01/04/2011  6 Mail returned on 12/23/2010 addressed to Paul Neuharth, Jr. for Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, re: 12/16/10 Time Schedule Order. Resending to: 1140 Union Street, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92101. [7599036] (RL) [Entered: 01/04/2011 11:24 AM]
01/12/2011  7 Mail returned on 01/12/2011 addressed to Paul Neuharth, Jr. for Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, re: 01/03/11 Order Setting assessment Conference. Resending to: PAUL NEUHARTH, JR 1140 Union Street, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92101. [7609639] (RL) [Entered: 01/12/2011 01:21 PM]
01/31/2011  8 
1 pg, 22.88 KB
Filed order MEDIATION (PWS): The court has determined that this appeal will not be selected for inclusion in the Mediation Program. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant further settlement discussions while the appeal is pending. [7630833] (SM) [Entered: 01/31/2011 03:31 PM]
03/03/2011  9 
15 pg, 389.74 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion to extend time to file Opening brief until 05/23/2011. Date of service: 03/03/2011. [7667356] (CDM) [Entered: 03/03/2011 02:52 PM]
03/07/2011  10 
1 pg, 23.48 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk:AMT): Appellants’ unopposed motion for a 60-day extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due May 23, 2011. The answering brief is due July 22, 2011. The optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the answering brief. [7670207] (SM) [Entered: 03/07/2011 09:57 AM]
04/21/2011  11 
7 pg, 415.66 KB
Received non party letter dated 04/19/2011 from attorney Allan J. Mayer re: This letter is written as a Friend of the Court. It is a suggestion to Aid this Court. [7727030] (RL) [Entered: 04/22/2011 02:47 PM]
04/25/2011  12 
30 pg, 1.89 MB
Filed non party request from attorney Allan J. Mayer to file amicus brief. Dated April 21, 2011. [7730593] (RL) [Entered: 04/26/2011 01:43 PM]
05/23/2011  13 
143 pg, 1.96 MB
Submitted (ECF) Opening brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 05/23/2011. [7761939] (CDM) [Entered: 05/23/2011 11:47 PM]
05/24/2011  14 
1 pg, 80.92 KB
Filed clerk order: The opening brief [13] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a blue cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7762378] (SLH) [Entered: 05/24/2011 10:33 AM]
05/24/2011  15 
24 pg, 909.06 KB
Received Appellants’ notice of filing under seal sections of excerpts of record, volumes 6-8, pursuant to protective orders (attached). [7763342] (LA) [Entered: 05/24/2011 03:55 PM]
05/24/2011  16 Filed Appellants’ excerpts of record in 8 volumes (Vols. 6-8 FILED UNDER SEAL). Served on 05/23/2011. [7763345] (LA) [Entered: 05/24/2011 03:56 PM]
05/25/2011  17 
42 pg, 6.14 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY, INC.. Date of service: 05/25/2011. [7763613]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief (cover). Resent NDA. 05/25/2011 by RY] (SPH) [Entered: 05/25/2011 07:06 AM]
05/25/2011  18 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Congress of Racial Equality. [7764840] (LA) [Entered: 05/25/2011 03:30 PM]
05/25/2011  19 
2 pg, 81.67 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [17] submitted by Congress of Racial Equality is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7764842] (LA) [Entered: 05/25/2011 03:31 PM]
05/27/2011  20 
33 pg, 295.2 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by National Rifle Association of America, Inc.. Date of service: 05/27/2011. [7767051] (PDC) [Entered: 05/27/2011 12:16 PM]
05/27/2011  21 Received 7 paper copies of Opening brief [13] filed by Appellants. [7767195] (SD) [Entered: 05/27/2011 01:57 PM]
05/27/2011  22 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae NRA. [7767334] (LA) [Entered: 05/27/2011 02:37 PM]
05/27/2011  23 
2 pg, 81.24 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [20] submitted by NRA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7767335] (LA) [Entered: 05/27/2011 02:37 PM]
05/30/2011  24 
37 pg, 324.11 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association. Independence Institute. Date of service: 05/30/2011. [7767759] (DK) [Entered: 05/30/2011 05:03 PM]
05/31/2011  25 
4 pg, 40.12 KB
Filed (ECF) Errata to Amicus Brief ([20] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ). Filed by Amicus Curiae NRA. Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7768097] (PDC) [Entered: 05/31/2011 10:14 AM]
05/31/2011  26 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae ILEETA and Independence Institute. [7768222] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 10:46 AM]
05/31/2011  27 
2 pg, 81.31 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [24] submitted by Independence Institute and ILEETA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7768224] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 10:47 AM]
05/31/2011  28 
32 pg, 181.83 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, and Brett Stewart. Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7768686] (AG) [Entered: 05/31/2011 02:01 PM]
05/31/2011  29 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards and Brett Stewart. [7768971] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 03:11 PM]
05/31/2011  30 
2 pg, 81.29 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [28] submitted by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7768976] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 03:12 PM]
05/31/2011  31 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [17] filed by Congress of Racial Equality. [7769002] (SD) [Entered: 05/31/2011 03:17 PM]
05/31/2011  32 
19 pg, 59.95 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence; Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership; Law Enforcement Alliance of America. Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7769312] (JCE) [Entered: 05/31/2011 05:03 PM]
05/31/2011  33 
122 pg, 2.37 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Gun Owners of California and Senator H. L. Richardson (Ret.). Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7769386] (DK) [Entered: 05/31/2011 07:53 PM]
06/01/2011  34 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO, LEAA, Gun Owners of California and Senator H. L. Richardson (Retired). [7769701] (LA) [Entered: 06/01/2011 09:43 AM]
06/01/2011  35 
2 pg, 81.6 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [32] submitted by Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO and LEAA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7769706] (LA) [Entered: 06/01/2011 09:44 AM]
06/01/2011  36 
2 pg, 81.57 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [33] submitted by Senator H. L. Richardson (Retired) and Gun Owners of California is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7769709] (LA) [Entered: 06/01/2011 09:46 AM]
06/02/2011  37 
5 pg, 52.85 KB
Filed (ECF) Errata to Amicus Brief ([33] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ). Filed by Amici Curiae H. L. Richardson and The Gun Owners of California. Date of service: 06/02/2011. [7771543] (DK) [Entered: 06/02/2011 02:48 PM]
06/02/2011  38 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [33] filed by H. L. Richardson and The Gun Owners of California. [7772511] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 10:04 AM]
06/03/2011  39 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [24] filed by Independence Institute and ILEETA. [7773729] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 03:06 PM]
06/03/2011  40 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [28] filed by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart. [7773893] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 03:36 PM]
06/03/2011  41 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [20] filed by NRA. [7773924] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 03:39 PM]
06/06/2011  42 
4 pg, 72.25 KB
Filed (ECF) Errata to Opening Brief ([13] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ). Filed by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 06/06/2011. [7775088]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected cover page. Resent NDA. 06/06/2011 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 06/06/2011 12:15 PM]
06/07/2011  43 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [32] filed by Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO and LEAA. [7776750] (SD) [Entered: 06/07/2011 11:53 AM]
06/08/2011  44 
19 pg, 108.86 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion for miscellaneous relief [Appellants’ Opposition to Richards v. Prieto Appellants Motion to Align Oral Argument With Relate Case, Filed In Case No. 11-16255]. Date of service: 06/08/2011. [7778889] (CDM) [Entered: 06/08/2011 03:59 PM]
06/17/2011  45 
1 pg, 22.42 KB
Filed order MEDIATION (PWS): The briefing schedule previously set by the court is reset as follows: appellees shall file an answering brief on or before August 12, 2011; appellants may file an optional reply brief on or before September 6, 2011. [7789330] (SM) [Entered: 06/17/2011 10:58 AM]
06/20/2011  46 
2 pg, 24.75 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GSS): Appellants Adam Richards, et al.’s opposed motion to align No. 10-56971 and 11-16255 for oral argument is denied. However, these cases shall be calendared before the same panel if practicable. The briefing schedule established on March 7, 2011 shall remain in effect for No. 10-56971. The briefing schedule established on May 19, 2011 shall remain in effect for No. 11-16255. [7790569] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 06/20/2011 09:06 AM]
07/08/2011  47 
63 pg, 578.43 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 07/08/2011. [7813793] (CDM) [Entered: 07/08/2011 04:56 PM]
08/12/2011  48 
36 pg, 105.45 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brady Center To Prevent Gun Violence, The International Brotherhood of Police Officers, and The Police Foundation. Date of service: 08/12/2011. [7856018] (NRO) [Entered: 08/12/2011 01:33 PM]
08/12/2011  49 
51 pg, 482.29 KB
Submitted (ECF) Answering brief for review. Submitted by Appellee William D. Gore. Date of service: 08/12/2011. [7856366] (JC) [Entered: 08/12/2011 02:48 PM]
08/12/2011  50 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation. [7856538] (LA) [Entered: 08/12/2011 03:35 PM]
08/12/2011  51 
2 pg, 81.88 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [48] submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7856541] (LA) [Entered: 08/12/2011 03:36 PM]
08/12/2011  52 
1 pg, 80.67 KB
Filed clerk order: The answering brief [49] submitted by County of San Diego and William D. Gore is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a red cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7856692] (SLH) [Entered: 08/12/2011 04:41 PM]
08/16/2011  53 Received 7 paper copies of Answering brief [49] filed by County of San Diego and William D. Gore. [7860106] (SD) [Entered: 08/16/2011 02:49 PM]
08/18/2011  54 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [48] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation. [7863236] (SD) [Entered: 08/18/2011 02:40 PM]
08/19/2011  55 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY: Correct Entry [59]. Original Text: Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by California State Sheriff’s Association; California Police Chiefs Association and California Peace Officer’s Association. Date of service: 08/19/2011. [7863959] (PRC) [Entered: 08/19/2011 09:30 AM]
08/19/2011  56 
44 pg, 240.01 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Legal Community Against Violence, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, and San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon. Date of service: 08/19/2011. [7865007] (SJF) [Entered: 08/19/2011 04:32 PM]
08/23/2011  57 Entered appearance of 1) Amici Curiae: Legal Community Against Violence, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Association of Prosecuting Attorneys and George Gascon; 2) Amici Curiae – Pending: California State Sheriff’s Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California Peace Officers Association. [7868186] (LA) [Entered: 08/23/2011 04:13 PM]
08/23/2011  58 
2 pg, 82.25 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [56] submitted by Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, George Gascon, Legal Community Against Violence and Major Cities Chiefs Association is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7868191] (LA) [Entered: 08/23/2011 04:16 PM]
08/24/2011  59 
14 pg, 602.4 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by The California State sheriff’s Association; The California Police Chiefs Association; California Peace Officers Association. Date of service: 08/24/2011. [7868845] (PRC) [Entered: 08/24/2011 11:05 AM]
08/24/2011  60 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [56] filed by Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, et al. [7870195] (SD) [Entered: 08/25/2011 08:53 AM]
08/29/2011  61 
1 pg, 24.48 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AMT): The motion of the California State Sherriff’s Association (“CSSA”), the California Police Chiefs Associations (“CPCA”), and the California Peace Officers Association (“CPOA”) (collectively “Applicants”) for leave to file an amicus brief is granted. Within seven days of the filing of this order, Applicants are ordered to file seven copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Any further motion to file amicus curiae briefs shall be treated in the same fashion. [7874649] (WL) [Entered: 08/29/2011 01:20 PM]
08/29/2011  62 
1 pg, 24.68 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AMT): This order amends the August 29, 2011 order of the court. The motion of the California State Sherriff’s Association (“CSSA”), the California Police Chiefs Associations (“CPCA”), and the California Peace Officers Association (“CPOA”) (collectively “Applicants”) for leave to file an amicus brief, the proposed amicus brief, and any other related filings are referred to the merits panel for consideration. Within seven days of the filing of this order, Applicants are ordered to file seven copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Any further motion to file amicus curiae briefs shall be treated in the same fashion. [7875263] (WL) [Entered: 08/29/2011 03:56 PM]
08/30/2011  63 
3 pg, 121.39 KB
Filed (ECF) Amici Curiae – Pending California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 08/30/2011. [7875552]–[COURT UPDATE: Replaced PDF of corporate disclosure statement (searchable). Resent NDA. 08/30/2011 by TW] (PRC) [Entered: 08/30/2011 09:11 AM]
08/30/2011  64 COURT DELETED DUPLICATE ENTRY. Correct Entry: [63]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amici Curiae – Pending California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 08/30/2011. [7875593] (PRC) [Entered: 08/30/2011 09:23 AM]
09/01/2011  65 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [59] filed by California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association. [7880655] (DB) [Entered: 09/02/2011 11:00 AM]
09/06/2011  66 
41 pg, 176.57 KB
Submitted (ECF) Reply brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 09/06/2011. [7883641] (CDM) [Entered: 09/06/2011 10:11 PM]
09/07/2011  67 
1 pg, 80.67 KB
Filed clerk order: The reply brief [66] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a gray cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7884675] (RH) [Entered: 09/07/2011 02:15 PM]
09/09/2011  68 Received 7 paper copies of Reply brief [66] filed by appellants. [7888429] (SD) [Entered: 09/09/2011 03:45 PM]
10/19/2011  69 
2 pg, 109.68 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellant Edward Peruta Correspondence: Letter regarding Second Notice of Appearance. Date of service: 10/19/2011 [7934900] (PDC) [Entered: 10/19/2011 03:06 PM]
10/19/2011  70 Added attorney Paul D. Clement for California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation Edward Peruta Mark Cleary Leslie Buncher Michelle Laxson James Dodd. [7934937] (RL) [Entered: 10/19/2011 03:12 PM]
10/20/2011  71 
2 pg, 93.3 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/20/2011. [7935787] (PDC) [Entered: 10/20/2011 10:56 AM]
10/24/2011  72 
18 pg, 138.05 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/24/2011. [7939320] (CDM) [Entered: 10/24/2011 12:19 PM]
10/27/2011  73 
3 pg, 61.64 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/27/2011. [7944202] (JC) [Entered: 10/27/2011 08:18 AM]
11/02/2011  74 
3 pg, 203.26 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/02/2011. [7951964] (CDM) [Entered: 11/02/2011 03:22 PM]
11/07/2011  75 
15 pg, 267.97 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/07/2011. [7957471] (CDM) [Entered: 11/07/2011 04:21 PM]
12/16/2011  76 
5 pg, 248.33 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/16/2011. [8004194] (CDM) [Entered: 12/16/2011 04:39 PM]
12/20/2011  77 
2 pg, 29.21 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): The court stays proceedings in this appeal pending this court’s en banc decision in Nordyke v. King, No. 07-15763, 2011 WL 5928130 (9th Cir. Nov. 28, 2011) (granting rehearing en banc). [8006308] (SM) [Entered: 12/20/2011 10:36 AM]
01/03/2012  78 
20 pg, 146.39 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta motion for reconsideration of non-dispositive Clerk Order of 12/20/2011. Date of service: 01/03/2012. [8018028] (CDM) [Entered: 01/03/2012 04:30 PM]
01/24/2012  79 
1 pg, 28.06 KB
Filed order (Appellate Commissioner) The en banc decision in Nordyke v. King, No. 07-15763 may contain legal analysis that would assist in the resolution of this appeal. Accordingly, appellants’ motion for reconsideration of the December 20, 2011 order staying this appeal pending the en banc decision in Nordyke is denied. (Appellate Commissioner) [8043254] (SM) [Entered: 01/24/2012 03:48 PM]
03/07/2012  80 
11 pg, 579.03 KB
Received letter dated 03/05/2012 from non-party attorney Allan J. Mayer re: This letter is written as a friend ofthe court. It is a suggestion to aid this court by the use of empirical statistical analysis as relevant to resolving 2nd Amendment issues. [8096406] (RL) [Entered: 03/08/2012 03:18 PM]
03/08/2012  81 
14 pg, 296.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/08/2012. [8096637] (CDM) [Entered: 03/08/2012 04:23 PM]
03/09/2012  82 
14 pg, 305.17 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/09/2012. [8098546] (CDM) [Entered: 03/09/2012 05:17 PM]
04/19/2012  83 
21 pg, 905.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 04/19/2012. [8146967] (CDM) [Entered: 04/19/2012 05:19 PM]
05/18/2012  84 
21 pg, 163.06 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 05/18/2012. [8184252] (CDM) [Entered: 05/18/2012 03:41 PM]
05/22/2012  85 
4 pg, 29.84 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore response opposing motion (,motion to lift stay). Date of service: 05/22/2012. [8186780] (JC) [Entered: 05/22/2012 11:14 AM]
05/25/2012  86 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [87]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8191708] (CDM) [Entered: 05/25/2012 10:32 AM]
05/25/2012  87 
6 pg, 75.1 KB
COURT-ENTERED FILING (to replace [86] with correct filing type). Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta reply to response (motion to lift stay). Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8192084] (ASW) [Entered: 05/25/2012 12:16 PM]
06/01/2012  88 
18 pg, 408.4 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/01/2012. [8199885] (CDM) [Entered: 06/01/2012 04:56 PM]
06/19/2012  89 
1 pg, 23.27 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GS): The appellants’ motion to lift the stay of appellate proceedings in No. 11- 16255 is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in No. 11-16255. [8220426] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 06/19/2012 03:32 PM]
06/25/2012  90 
1 pg, 22.82 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM) Appellants’ motion for relief from stay is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in this docket. Briefing is complete. This appeal is ready for calendaring. [8226655] (SM) [Entered: 06/25/2012 01:35 PM]
07/10/2012  91 
22 pg, 128.23 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Appellants’ Notice of Additional Related Cases and Status Thereof. Date of service: 07/10/2012 [8244725]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected notice. Resent NDA. 07/12/2012 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 07/10/2012 04:37 PM]
07/10/2012  92 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [91]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Notice of Errata to Appellants’ Notice of Additional Related Cases and Status Thereof. Date of service: 07/10/2012 [8244821] (CDM) [Entered: 07/10/2012 05:17 PM]
09/14/2012  93 
7 pg, 109.59 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion For Clarification & Coordination of Appeals In Related Cases]. Date of service: 09/14/2012. [8325030] (CDM) [Entered: 09/14/2012 04:52 PM]
09/24/2012  94 
2 pg, 26.41 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): Pursuant to the Motion for Clarification & Coordination of Appeals in Related Cases filed by Appellants in 10-56971, it is hereby ORDERED that arguments in 10-56971, 11-16255, and 12-16258 will be scheduled to be heard by the same panel on the same day. The date and time of the arguments will be determined in due course by subsequent order. [8335002] [10-56971, 11-16255, 12-16258] (SM) [Entered: 09/24/2012 02:41 PM]
10/09/2012  95 
10 pg, 449.97 KB
Notice of Oral Argument on Thursday, December 6, 2012 – 9:00 AM – Courtroom 1, 3rd Floor – James R. Browning US Courthouse – San Francisco, CA. Please return ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HEARING NOTICE form to: SAN FRANCISCO Office. Please open attached documents to view details about your case. [8352267] (RB) [Entered: 10/09/2012 12:52 PM]
10/09/2012  96 
2 pg, 80.13 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney James Chapin, Esquire for Appellees William D. Gore and County of San Diego. [8352408] (JC) [Entered: 10/09/2012 01:27 PM]
10/09/2012  97 
13 pg, 350.62 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): These appeals have been assigned to the same panel because they involve issues regarding the Second Amendment. The cases are not consolidated for oral argument. Counsel may wish to confer in order to enhance oral argument. The Clerk shall serve a copy of the court’s service list for each case on all parties. [8353131] [10-56971, 11-16255, 12-16258] (SM) [Entered: 10/09/2012 04:36 PM]
10/10/2012  98 
10 pg, 144.83 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Paul D. Clement for Amicus Curiae NRA and Appellants Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation. [8353541] (PDC) [Entered: 10/10/2012 09:09 AM]
10/11/2012  99 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY per request from filer (co-counsel for appellant already filed acknowledgement of hearing notice [98]. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr. for Appellants Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation. [8357338] (PHN) [Entered: 10/11/2012 04:47 PM]
10/17/2012  100 
1 pg, 56.47 KB
Filed Appellees County of San Diego and William D. Gore additional citations. Served on 10/15/2012. (panel) [8365457] (RL) [Entered: 10/17/2012 03:49 PM]
11/07/2012  101 
17 pg, 325.43 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/07/2012. [8392999] (CDM) [Entered: 11/07/2012 04:56 PM]
11/29/2012  102 
1 pg, 27.16 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): At oral argument, the parties should be prepared to discuss the significance, if any, of the absence of the State of California in this appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2403; Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1. [8419330] (SM) [Entered: 11/29/2012 10:13 AM]
11/30/2012  103 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Allen J. Mayer. [8421778] (WP) [Entered: 11/30/2012 03:16 PM]
11/30/2012  104 
10 pg, 521.68 KB
Received original and 7 copies of Amicus Curiae Allen J. Mayer brief in 4 pages. Served on: 04/02/2012. Major deficiencies:motion required to file an amicus brief. [8421821] (WP) [Entered: 11/30/2012 03:24 PM]
12/03/2012  105 
2 pg, 74.31 KB
Filed Appellees County of San Diego and William D. Gore additional citations. Served on 11/29/2012. (panel) [8423646] (RL) [Entered: 12/03/2012 04:40 PM]
12/05/2012  106 
3 pg, 273.91 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/05/2012. [8426271] (PDC) [Entered: 12/05/2012 11:23 AM]
12/06/2012  107 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN. [8428091] (RB) [Entered: 12/06/2012 12:02 PM]
12/11/2012  108 
3 pg, 163.51 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/11/2012. [8434734] (PDC) [Entered: 12/11/2012 04:35 PM]
03/29/2013  109 
1 pg, 56.33 KB
Filed Appellees additional citations. no proof of service. (panel) [8571766] (JFF) [Entered: 04/01/2013 11:09 AM]
04/30/2013  110 
11 pg, 836.09 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 04/30/2013. [8610109]–[COURT UPDATE: Replaced PDF (to include COS), resent notice. 05/01/2013 by ASW] (PDC) [Entered: 04/30/2013 01:40 PM]
09/13/2013  111 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [112]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 09/13/2013. [8781557] (CDM) [Entered: 09/13/2013 12:17 PM]
09/13/2013  112 
15 pg, 290.02 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 09/13/2013. [8781590] (CDM) [Entered: 09/13/2013 12:29 PM]
12/06/2013  113 
60 pg, 595.12 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/06/2013. [8891788] (CDM) [Entered: 12/06/2013 10:09 AM]
02/12/2014  114 
1 pg, 32.87 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN)The Motion and Application for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief on Behalf of Appellees County of San Diego, et al, filed with this court on August 19, 2011, by the California State Sheriffs Association, the California Police Chiefs Association, and the California Peace Officers Association, is GRANTED. [8977187] (SM) [Entered: 02/12/2014 04:55 PM]
02/12/2014  115 
1 pg, 83.05 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [59] submitted by California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association is filed. No additional paper copies of the brief are required. [8977252] (LA) [Entered: 02/12/2014 05:55 PM]
02/13/2014  116 
132 pg, 884.53 KB
FILED OPINION (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) REVERSED AND REMANDED. Judge: DFO Authoring, Judge: SRT Dissenting, FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [8977540] (RP) [Entered: 02/13/2014 09:50 AM]
02/18/2014  117 
3 pg, 43.78 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Correspondence re Counsel Listing in Published Opinion. Date of service: 02/18/2014 [8981119] (CDM) [Entered: 02/18/2014 11:29 AM]
02/21/2014  118 
2 pg, 60.92 KB
Copy of letter received from Bobie K. Ross for aplt Peruta, response to 2/18/14 letter re counsel listed in opinion. [8989604] (CW) [Entered: 02/24/2014 12:14 PM]
02/26/2014  119 
1 pg, 29.54 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore Correspondence: Request to correct published opinion.. Date of service: 02/26/2014 [8993802] (JC) [Entered: 02/26/2014 01:08 PM]
02/26/2014  120 
4 pg, 69.98 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta bill of costs (Form 10) in the amount of $1,280.80 USD. Date of service: 02/26/2014 [8994696] (CDM) [Entered: 02/26/2014 05:04 PM]
02/27/2014  121 
77 pg, 4.98 MB
Filed (ECF) Amici Curiae California Peace Officers Association and California Police Chiefs Association petition for rehearing en banc (from 02/13/2014 opinion). Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996109]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached searchable version of petition. Resent NDA. 02/27/2014 by RY] (PRC) [Entered: 02/27/2014 02:37 PM]
02/27/2014  122 
184 pg, 1.26 MB
Filed (ECF) State of California Petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc, Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing, Motion to stay the mandate, and Motion to intervene. Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996638]–[COURT UPDATE: Removed Application for Exemption under 9th Cir. R. 46-5 (counsel notified must be refiled separately via Appellate ECF). Edited docket text to reflect content of filing. Resent NDA. 02/28/2014 by RY] (GDB) [Entered: 02/27/2014 04:41 PM]
02/27/2014  123 
191 pg, 33.03 MB
Submitted (ECF) Intervenor brief for review and filed Motion to intervene. Submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996736] (NRO) [Entered: 02/27/2014 06:49 PM]
02/27/2014  124 COURT DELETED DUPLICATE ENTRY. Resubmitted amicus brief using correct ECF event. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [133]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence petition for rehearing en banc (from 02/13/2014 opinion). Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996737] (SJF) [Entered: 02/27/2014 06:49 PM]
02/27/2014  133 
136 pg, 541.39 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus Brief for review. Submitted by Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence. Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8999469]–[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [124].] (RY) [Entered: 03/03/2014 02:38 PM]
02/28/2014  125 
1 pg, 29.34 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 02/28/2014. [8997386] (NRO) [Entered: 02/28/2014 11:32 AM]
02/28/2014  126 
2 pg, 35.1 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence’s Motion to Extend Time for Filing a Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Stay the Issuance of the Mandate, and Proposed Intervenor State of California’s Motion to Extend Time to File a Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Stay Issuance of the Mandate, both filed with this Court on February 27, 2014, are GRANTED. Any proposed petitions for rehearing filed with this Court by February 27, 2014 will be considered timely if this Court grants the petitioners’ concurrently filed motions to intervene. This order does not extend the time for filing petitions for rehearing for any petitioner who did not move to intervene by February 27, 2014. Submission with respect to the pending motions to intervene is deferred pending further order of the Court. Issuance of the mandate is stayed pending further order of the Court. [8997978] (WL) [Entered: 02/28/2014 03:22 PM]
02/28/2014  127 Entered appearance of Intervenor – Pending State of California. [8998096] (MT) [Entered: 02/28/2014 03:48 PM]
02/28/2014  128 
2 pg, 411.37 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Ross C. Moody for Intervenor – Pending State of California. Date of service: 02/28/2014. [8998239] (RM) [Entered: 02/28/2014 04:32 PM]
02/28/2014  129 Added attorney Ross Moody for State of California, in case 10-56971. [8998245] (EL) [Entered: 02/28/2014 04:34 PM]
03/03/2014  130 
2 pg, 13.67 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Craig J. Konnoth for Intervenor – Pending State of California. Date of service: 03/03/2014. [8998809] (GDB) [Entered: 03/03/2014 10:38 AM]
03/03/2014  131 
7 pg, 148.59 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California Motion for 46-5 exemption. Date of service: 03/03/2014. [8998813] (GDB) [Entered: 03/03/2014 10:40 AM]
03/03/2014  132 Added attorney Craig Konnoth for State of California, in case 10-56971. [8999024] (CW) [Entered: 03/03/2014 11:54 AM]
03/05/2014  134 
30 pg, 156.29 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle. Date of service: 03/05/2014. [9003941] (SJF) [Entered: 03/05/2014 04:32 PM]
03/05/2014  135 
2 pg, 40.5 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Each party is each directed to file a response of no more than 6,000 words addressing the pending motions to intervene filed with this Court on February 27, 2014. Each response shall address: 1) Motion to Intervene by the State of California, 2) Motion for Leave to Intervene by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and 3) Petition for Rehearing En Banc by Amici Curiae California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association insofar as the Petition is a motion to intervene. See p. 2, n.2. The responses shall be filed within 21 days of this order. [9004006] (SM) [Entered: 03/05/2014 04:50 PM]
03/05/2014  136 
1 pg, 32.94 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) The Application for Exemption under Ninth Circuit Rule 46-5, filed by Craig J. Konnoth with this Court on March 3, 2014, is GRANTED. [9004014] (SM) [Entered: 03/05/2014 04:53 PM]
03/06/2014  137 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle. [9004425] (RL) [Entered: 03/06/2014 09:44 AM]
03/11/2014  138 
7 pg, 66.65 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion for miscellaneous relief [Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request; Declaration of Sean A. Brady In Support Thereof]. Date of service: 03/11/2014. [9011001] (CDM) [Entered: 03/11/2014 01:10 PM]
03/12/2014  139 
2 pg, 55.03 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Appellants Response to Appellees Counsel Listing in Published Opinion. Date of service: 03/12/2014 [9013284] (CDM) [Entered: 03/12/2014 03:23 PM]
03/13/2014  140 
3 pg, 94.33 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore Correspondence: Response re: request to correct published opinion. Date of service: 03/13/2014 [9015117] (JC) [Entered: 03/13/2014 03:07 PM]
03/14/2014  141 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [141]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer response to Party Case , Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) motion to become amicus, Notice of Appearance (ECF Filing) , Corporate Disclosure Statement (ECF Filing). Date of service: 03/14/2014. [9016119]. (AJM) [Entered: 03/14/2014 11:20 AM]
03/14/2014  142 
6 pg, 1.09 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer. Date of service: 03/14/2014. (COURT-ENTERED Filing to replace incorrect entry by filer [141]). [9017247] (ASW) [Entered: 03/14/2014 04:29 PM]
03/17/2014  143 
10 pg, 31.01 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta response opposing motion (,motion to become amicus). Date of service: 03/17/2014. [9019487] (CDM) [Entered: 03/17/2014 06:02 PM]
03/20/2014  144 
6 pg, 48.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence and Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle reply to response (, ). Date of service: 03/20/2014. [9024303] (SJF) [Entered: 03/20/2014 01:14 PM]
03/26/2014  145 
30 pg, 61.35 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta response opposing motion (motion to intervene). Date of service: 03/26/2014. [9033121]–[COURT UPDATE: Edited docket text to reflect content of filing. Resent NDA. 03/27/2014 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 03/26/2014 10:26 PM]
03/27/2014  146 
1 pg, 33.44 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request is GRANTED. The deadline is extended until thirty days after the latest of: (1) the denial of all pending motions to intervene, (2) the denial of any properly filed petition for rehearing en banc, or (3) the filing of a disposition by an en banc panel. [9034369] (WL) [Entered: 03/27/2014 02:20 PM]
04/02/2014  147 
16 pg, 272.03 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California reply to response (, ,motion to intervene). Date of service: 04/02/2014. [9042130]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected reply (includes certificate of service). Resent NDA. 04/02/2014 by RY] (CK) [Entered: 04/02/2014 04:06 PM]
04/02/2014  148 
17 pg, 47.17 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence reply to response (,motion to intervene, ). Date of service: 04/02/2014. [9042383] (NRO) [Entered: 04/02/2014 05:59 PM]
04/03/2014  149 
1 pg, 37.46 KB
Filed Appellee William D. Gore letter dated 04/01/2014 re: Client has directed csl to not file anything further on appeal. No response regarding motions to intervene will be filed. Letter was submitted in paper format rather than ECF. PANEL . Paper filing deficiency: None. [9044210] (CW) [Entered: 04/04/2014 08:00 AM]
04/17/2014  150 
2 pg, 108.01 KB
Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer letter dated 04/10/2014 re: it is time for the Supreme Court to resolve this 2nd amendment issue. Paper filing deficiency: None. [9062526] (PANEL) (EL) [Entered: 04/17/2014 02:53 PM]
04/28/2014  151 
2 pg, 107.11 KB
Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer letter dated 04/10/2014 re: The judicial reasons for submitting opposition(PANEL). Paper filing deficiency: None. [9075848] (JFF) [Entered: 04/29/2014 09:38 AM]
05/01/2014  152 
2 pg, 44.67 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellee William D. Gore is ordered to notify this Court in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order of his position on the pending motions to intervene or that he takes no position. Appellee William D. Gore is further ordered to respond within fourteen days of the date of this order to the suggestion that this case is moot. See Opp’n to Pet. for Reh’g En Banc 16, Richards v. Prieto, No. 11-16255 (“Even were Peruta vacated tomorrow, neither this Court nor the state could do anything to keep Gore from printing permits to all otherwise-qualified comers. The Peruta dispute is moot.”). He shall explain any change in his policy that could affect this Court’s jurisdiction over this case. [9078973] (WL) [Entered: 05/01/2014 08:18 AM]
05/14/2014  153 
2 pg, 304.44 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore response to Court order dated 05/01/2014. Date of service: 05/14/2014. [9095344] (JC) [Entered: 05/14/2014 01:00 PM]
08/22/2014  154 
2 pg, 34.41 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California Correspondence: Notice of Departure of Craig J. Konnoth from the Department of Justice; Request to Remove Mr. Konnoth from Service List. Date of service: 08/22/2014 [9216673] (GDB) [Entered: 08/22/2014 05:43 PM]
08/25/2014  155 Terminated Craig Konnoth for State of California in 10-56971 [9216762] (CW) [Entered: 08/25/2014 07:33 AM]
11/12/2014  156 
20 pg, 119.57 KB
Filed Order for PUBLICATION (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) (Dissent by Judge Thomas) We must rule on motions to intervene in this Second Amendment case which were filed after our opinion and judgment reversing the District Court were filed. (SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT) The State of California’s Motion to Intervene is DENIED. The Brady Campaign’s Motion for Leave to Intervene is DENIED. CPCA and CPOA’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc, construed as a motion to intervene, is DENIED. [9308663] (RP) [Entered: 11/12/2014 06:58 AM]
11/26/2014  157 
64 pg, 480.12 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc (from 11/12/2014 opinion). Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329047] [10-56971] (GDB) [Entered: 11/26/2014 04:17 PM]
11/26/2014  158 
8 pg, 24.41 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion to join State of California petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc]. Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329149] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect content of filing. 11/28/2014 by TL] (JC) [Entered: 11/26/2014 04:56 PM]
11/26/2014  159 
9 pg, 234.93 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion to extend time to comply with the order dated 03/27/2014. Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329171] [10-56971] (CDM) [Entered: 11/26/2014 05:18 PM]
12/03/2014  160 
1 pg, 33.61 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Plaintiff-Appellants are directed to file a response to Proposed Intervenor- Appellee’s petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc filed with this Court on November 26, 2014. The response shall not exceed thirty-five (35) pages, and shall be filed within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order. [9334888] (SM) [Entered: 12/03/2014 09:23 AM]
12/03/2014  161 
2 pg, 42.36 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) A judge of this Court having made a sua sponte call for a vote on whether this case should be reheard en banc, the parties shall file, within 21 days from the date of this order, simultaneous briefs setting forth their respective positions on whether this case should be reheard en banc. See G.O. 5.4(c)(3). Amici curiae wishing to file briefs regarding whether this case should be reheard en banc may also do so within 21 days from the date of this order. Parties who are registered for ECF should file the brief electronically without submission of paper copies. Parties who are not registered ECF filers should submit the original brief plus 50 paper copies. [9336038] (SM) [Entered: 12/03/2014 03:47 PM]
12/08/2014  162 
14 pg, 58.98 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/08/2014. [9341224] [10-56971] (SJF) [Entered: 12/08/2014 04:03 PM]
12/08/2014  164 
10 pg, 389.35 KB
Received original and 3 copies of Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer brief in 3 pages. Served on: 12/03/2014. Major deficiencies: previous motion to become amicus pending. [9342842] (TLH) [Entered: 12/09/2014 03:16 PM]
12/09/2014  163 
2 pg, 86.3 KB
ENTRY UPDATED. Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [162] submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 20 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9342774] –[Edited 12/09/2014 by TLH to correct number of copies] (TLH) [Entered: 12/09/2014 02:59 PM]
12/12/2014  165 Received 20 paper copies of Amicus brief [162] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. [9348865] (TLH) [Entered: 12/15/2014 10:00 AM]
12/17/2014  166 
26 pg, 806.56 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Sheriff Ed Prieto and County of Yolo. Date of service: 12/17/2014. [9352960] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/18/2014 by TL] (JAW) [Entered: 12/17/2014 11:49 AM]
12/18/2014  167 
1 pg, 28.64 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Kathryn Linde Marshall for Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/18/2014. [9354572] [10-56971] (KLM) [Entered: 12/18/2014 10:27 AM]
12/18/2014  168 Added attorney Kathryn Linde Marshall for Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in case 10-56971. [9354584] (JFF) [Entered: 12/18/2014 10:31 AM]
12/18/2014  169 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Edward G. Prieto and County of Yolo. [9355053] (TLH) [Entered: 12/18/2014 01:51 PM]
12/18/2014  170 
1 pg, 83.41 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [166] submitted by County of Yolo and Sheriff Edward G. Prieto is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9355057] (TLH) [Entered: 12/18/2014 01:52 PM]
12/22/2014  171 COURT DELETED DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [172]. Original Text: Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9358313] [10-56971] (KLM) [Entered: 12/22/2014 01:05 PM]
12/22/2014  172 
161 pg, 1.34 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9358350] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/23/2014 by TL] (KLM) [Entered: 12/22/2014 01:12 PM]
12/22/2014  173 
20 pg, 96.58 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9358991] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/23/2014 by TL] (MJM) [Entered: 12/22/2014 03:47 PM]
12/22/2014  174 
31 pg, 1.05 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by State of Hawaii. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9359324] [10-56971] (GDL) [Entered: 12/22/2014 05:36 PM]
12/23/2014  175 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae State of Hawaii, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association. [9359657] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 09:53 AM]
12/23/2014  176 Terminated Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in 10-56971 to remove duplicate appearance from docket [9359668] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 09:57 AM]
12/23/2014  177 
1 pg, 82.97 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [174] submitted by State of Hawaii is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9359680] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 10:01 AM]
12/23/2014  178 
1 pg, 83.52 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [172] submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9359698] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 10:06 AM]
12/23/2014  179 
6 pg, 336.3 KB
Submitted (ECF) Supplemental Brief for review. Submitted by Appellee William D. Gore. Date of service: 12/23/2014. [9359744] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/23/2014 by TL] (JC) [Entered: 12/23/2014 10:17 AM]
12/23/2014  180 
1 pg, 83.19 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [173] submitted by California Peace Officers’ Association and California Police Chiefs’ Association is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9359973] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 11:22 AM]
12/23/2014  181 
26 pg, 198.07 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/23/2014. [9360467] [10-56971] (SJF) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:31 PM]
12/23/2014  182 
1 pg, 83.02 KB
Filed clerk order: The supplemental brief [179] submitted by William D. Gore is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9360473] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:34 PM]
12/23/2014  183 
1 pg, 83.49 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [181] submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9360495] (TLH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:41 PM]
12/24/2014  184 
22 pg, 404.76 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC.; FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, INC.; CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, INC.; PINK PISTOLS; GUN RIGHTS ACROSS AMERICA; LIBERAL GUN OWNERS ASSOCIATION; MADISON SOCIETY, INC.; HAWAII DEFENSE FOUNDATION; FLORIDA CARRY, INC.; ILLINOIS CARRY; KNIFE RIGHTS FOUNDATION, INC.; AND SECOND AMENDMENT PLAINTIFFS OPPOSING REHEARING EN BANC. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9361729] [10-56971] (BAB) [Entered: 12/24/2014 12:02 PM]
12/24/2014  185 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. [9361942] (TLH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 01:57 PM]
12/24/2014  186 
1 pg, 83.01 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [184] submitted by Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9361947] (TLH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 02:00 PM]

 

General Docket
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 10-56971 Docketed: 12/16/2010
Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights
Edward Peruta, et al v. County of San Diego, et al
Appeal From: U.S. District Court for Southern California, San Diego
Fee Status: Paid
Case Type Information:
     1) civil
     2) private
     3) null
Originating Court Information:
     District: 0974-3 : 3:09-cv-02371-IEG-BGS
     Court Reporter: Frank Joseph Rangus, Official Court Reporter
     Trial Judge: Irma E. Gonzalez, Senior District Judge
     Date Filed: 10/23/2009
     Date Order/Judgment:      Date Order/Judgment EOD:      Date NOA Filed:      Date Rec’d COA:
     12/10/2010      12/10/2010      12/14/2010      12/14/2010
Prior Cases:
     None
Current Cases:
Lead Member Start End
     Consolidated
10-56971 11-16255 04/01/2015
     Related
09-16852 11-16255 05/19/2011

 

EDWARD PERUTA
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Bancroft PLLC
500 New Jersey Avenue, NW
7th Floor
Washington, DC 20001Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Paul Neuharth, Jr. APC
102
Firm: 619-231-0401
1140 Union St.
San Diego, CA 92101Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
Michel & Associates, P.C.
Suite 200
180 E. Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
MICHELLE LAXSON
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
JAMES DODD
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
LESLIE BUNCHER, Dr.
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
MARK CLEARY
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr., Attorney
Direct: 619-231-0401
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Carl D. Michel, Esquire, Senior Attorney
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Intervenor,
Gregory David Brown, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGCA – Office of the California Attorney General
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102Edward C. DuMont
Direct: 415-703-2540
[COR NTC Government]
California Department of Justice
455 Golden Gate Avenue
Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102
   v.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Defendant – Appellee,
James Chapin, Esquire, Senior Deputy County Counsel
Direct: 619-531-5244
[COR NTC County Counsel]
Office of County Counsel
355
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
WILLIAM D. GORE, individually and in his capacity as Sheriff
Defendant – Appellee,
James Chapin, Esquire, Senior Deputy County Counsel
Direct: 619-531-5244
[COR NTC County Counsel]
(see above)
——————————
CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY
Amicus Curiae,
Stephen Porter Halbrook, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Retained]
3925 Chain Bridge Road
Fairfax, VA 22030Stefan B. Tahmassebi, Deputy General Counsel
Direct: 703-267-1259
[COR LD NTC Retained]
National Rifle Association of America
Office of Legislative Counsel
Firm: 703-267-1166
11250 Waples Mill Rd., 5N
Fairfax, VA 22030
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Paul D. Clement, Attorney
Direct: 202-234-0090
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Charles J. Cooper
Direct: 202-220-9600
[COR LD NTC Retained]
COOPER & KIRK, PLLC
1523 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
ALLAN JEROME MAYER, Attorney
Amicus Curiae – Pending,
Allan Jerome Mayer, Attorney
Direct: 805/544-7081
[NTC Pro Se]
1650 El Cerrito Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATORS AND TRAINERS ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
David Kopel
Direct: 303-279-6536
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Independence Institute
Firm: 303-279-6536
727 East 16th Avenue
Denver, CO 80203Dan M. Peterson, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Dan M Peterson PLLC
3925 Chain Bridge Road
Suite 403
Fairfax, VA 22030
ROBERT T. DOYLE, Marin County Sheriff
Amicus Curiae – Pending,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
[COR NTC Retained]
Covington & Burling, LLP
One Front Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5356
INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE
Amicus Curiae,
David Kopel
Direct: 303-279-6536
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
PATRICK MISSUD
Terminated: 05/21/2015
Amicus Curiae – Pending,
SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Gura & Possessky, PLLC
suite # 305
105 Oronoco Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
CALGUNS FOUNDATION, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
ADAM RICHARDS
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
BRETT STEWART
Amicus Curiae,
Alan Gura
Direct: 703-835-9085
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE
Amicus Curiae,
John C. Eastman
Direct: 714-628-2587
[COR LD NTC Retained]
THE CLAREMONT INSTITUTE CENTER FOR
CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE
c/o Chapman Univ. School of Law
One University Drive
Orange, CA 92866
DOCTORS FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP
Amicus Curiae,
John C. Eastman
Direct: 714-628-2587
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE OF AMERICA
Amicus Curiae,
John C. Eastman
Direct: 714-628-2587
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Dan M. Peterson, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
THE GUN OWNERS OF CALIFORNIA
Amicus Curiae,
Don Kates
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Michel & Associates, P.C.
Suite 200
180 E. Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
H. L. RICHARDSON, Senator (Retired)
Amicus Curiae,
Don Kates
Direct: 562-216-4444
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Amicus Curiae,
Neil R. O’Hanlon, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 310-785-4660
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Hogan Lovells US LLP
Suite 1400
1999 Avenue of the Stars
Los Angeles, CA 90067Kathryn Linde Marshall
Direct: 202-637-5771
[COR NTC Retained]
Hogan Lovells US LLP
Firm: 202-637-5600
555 Thirteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF POLICE OFFICERS
Amicus Curiae,
Neil R. O’Hanlon, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 310-785-4660
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
POLICE FOUNDATION
Amicus Curiae,
Neil R. O’Hanlon, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 310-785-4660
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LEGAL COMMUNITY AGAINST VIOLENCE
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
MAJOR CITIES CHIEFS ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
ASSOCIATION OF PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
GEORGE GASCON, San Francisco District Attorney
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
CALIFORNIA SHERRIFS’ ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Paul R. Coble, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 714-446-1400
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Jones & Mayer
3777 N. Harbor Boulevard
Fullerton, CA 92835
LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Amicus Curiae,
Simon J. Frankel, Esquire, Attorney
[COR NTC Retained]
(see above)
EDWARD G. PRIETO, Sheriff
Amicus Curiae,
John A. Whitesides, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 916-564-6100
[COR LD NTC Retained]
ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF
150
Firm: (916) 5646100
601 University Avenue
Suite 150
Sacramento, CA 95825
COUNTY OF YOLO
Amicus Curiae,
John A. Whitesides, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 916-564-6100
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
STATE OF HAWAII
Amicus Curiae,
Girard Douglas Lau, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General
[COR LD NTC State Atty General]
AGHI – OFFICE OF THE HAWAII ATTORNEY GENERAL
Firm: 808-568-1180
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96813Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry
Direct: 808-586-1360
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGHI – OFFICE OF THE HAWAII ATTORNEY GENERAL
Firm: 808-568-1180
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96813Robert Tadao Nakatsuji, Esquire
Direct: 808-586-1360
[COR NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
AGHI – OFFICE OF THE HAWAII ATTORNEY GENERAL
Firm: 808-568-1180
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Terminated: 12/23/2014
Amicus Curiae,
CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS’ ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Paul R. Coble, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 714-446-1400
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Martin Joel Mayer
Direct: 714-446-1440
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Jones & Mayer
3777 N. Harbor Boulevard
Fullerton, CA 92835
CALIFORNIA PEACE OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
Paul R. Coble, Esquire, Attorney
Direct: 714-446-1400
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Martin Joel Mayer
Direct: 714-446-1440
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC., FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, INC.; CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, INC.; PINK PISTOLS; GUN RIGHTS ACROSS AMERICA; LIBERAL GUN OWNERS ASSOCIATION; MADISON SOCIETY, INC.; HAWAII DEFENSE FOUNDATION; FLORIDA CARRY, INC.; ILLINOIS CARRY; KNIFE RIGHTS FOUNDATION, INC.; and SECOND AMENDMENT PLAINTIFFS
Amicus Curiae,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Benbrook Law Group
400 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, CA 95814
CHARLES NICHOLS, President of California Right to Carry
Amicus Curiae,
Charles Nichols
Direct: 424-634-7381
[NTC Pro Se]
Charles Nichols
P. O. Box 1302
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
PINK PISTOLS
Amicus Curiae,
Brian S. Koukoutchos
Direct: 985-626-5052
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Brian S. Koukoutchos
28 Eagle Trace
Mandeville, LA 70471
WOMEN AGAINST GUN CONTROL, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Brian S. Koukoutchos
Direct: 985-626-5052
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
SECOND AMENDMENT SISTERS
Amicus Curiae,
Brian S. Koukoutchos
Direct: 985-626-5052
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
Amicus Curiae,
Thomas Peter Pierce
Direct: 213-626-8484
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Richards, Watson & Gershon
40th Floor
355 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3101
GOVERNORS, STATES OF TEXAS, LOUISIANA, MAINE, MISSISSIPPI, OKLAHOMA, AND SOUTH DAKOTA
Amicus Curiae,
Andrew Stephen Oldham, Deputy General Counsel
Direct: 512-463-1788
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Office of the General Counsel
1100 San Jacinto Blvd
Austin, TX 78711
STATE OF ALABAMA, ALASKA, ARKANSAS, FLORIDA, IDAHO, KANSAS, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MICHIGAN, MISSOURI, MONTANA, NEVADA, NORTH DAKOTA, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, SOUTH CAROLINA, SOUTH DAKOTA, TEXAS, UTAH, WEST VIRGINIA, and WISCONSIN
Amicus Curiae,
Andrew Lynn Brasher, Solicitor
Direct: 334-353-2609
[COR LD NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
Office of Attorney General
501 Washington Avenue
Montgomery, AL 36130
GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA, INC., GUN OWNERS FOUNDATION, U.S. JUSTICE FOUNDATION, LINCOLN INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, ABRAHAM LINCOLN FOUNDATION FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH, INC., POLICY ANALYSIS CENTER, INSTITUTE ON THE CONSTITUTION, and CONSERVATIVE LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONFUND
Amicus Curiae,
Herbert W. Titus, Esquire
[COR LD NTC Retained]
William J. Olson, P.C.
370 Maple Ave. W
Suite 4
Vienna, VA 22180-5615
EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY
Amicus Curiae,
Deepak Gupta
Direct: 202-888-1741
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Gupta Wessler PLLC
1735 20th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20009
LAW ENFORCEMENT LEGAL DEFENSE FUND
Amicus Curiae,
Dan M. Peterson, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTION NETWORK
Amicus Curiae,
Dan M. Peterson, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
NEW YORK STATE RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION, ASSOCIATION OF NEW JERSEY RIFLE AND PISTOL CLUBS, COMMONWEALTH SECOND AMENDMENT, GUN OWNERS’ ACTION LEAGUE, and MARYLAND STATE RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION
Amicus Curiae,
David D. Jensen
Direct: 212-380-6615
[COR LD NTC Retained]
David Jensen PLLC
Suite # 420
111 John Street
New York, NY 10038
WESTERN STATES SHERIFFS’ ASSOCIATION, SHERIFF ADAM CHRISTIANSON, SHERIFF JON LOPEY, SHERIFF MARGARET MIMS, SHERIFF TOM BOSENKO, DAVID HENCRATT, SHERIFF STEVEN DURFOR, SHERIFF THOMAS ALLMAN, SHERIFF DAVID ROBINSON, SHERIFF SCOTT JONES, SHERIFF BRUCE HANEY, SHERIFF JOHN D’AGOSTINI, and RETIREDSHERIFF LARRY JONES
Amicus Curiae,
Jonathan S. Goldstein
Direct: 610-727-4191
[COR LD NTC Retained]
McNelly & Goldstein LLC
11 Church Road
Hatfield, PA 19440
THE MADISON SOCIETY, INC.
Amicus Curiae,
Brandon M. Kilian
Direct: 209-404-5135
[COR LD NTC Retained]
P.O. BOX 160
La Grange, CA 95329
MICHAEL JOHN VOGLER
Amicus Curiae,
Michael John Vogler
Direct: 626-375-5843
[NTC Pro Se]
Vogler Law Offices
520 California Terrace
Pasadena, CA 91105

EDWARD PERUTA; MICHELLE LAXSON; JAMES DODD; LESLIE BUNCHER, Dr.; MARK CLEARY; CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION,

Plaintiffs – Appellants,

v.

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; WILLIAM D. GORE, individually and in his capacity as Sheriff,

Defendants – Appellees,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

Intervenor – Pending.

12/16/2010  1 Added attorney Paul Neuharth Jr. for California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation Edward Peruta Mark Cleary Leslie Buncher Michelle Laxson James Dodd, in case 10-56971. [7582396] (GR) [Entered: 12/16/2010 08:11 AM]
12/16/2010  2 
15 pg, 688.23 KB
DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Mediation Questionnaire due on 12/23/2010. Transcript ordered by 01/13/2011. Transcript due 02/14/2011. Appellant Leslie Buncher, Appellant California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Appellant Mark Cleary, Appellant James Dodd, Appellant Michelle Laxson and Appellant Edward Peruta opening brief due 03/24/2011. Appellee County of San Diego and Appellee William D. Gore answering brief due 04/25/2011. Appellant’s optional reply brief is due 14 days after service of the answering brief. [7582398] (GR) [Entered: 12/16/2010 08:13 AM]
12/16/2010  3 
3 pg, 46.84 KB
Filed representation notice [7582404] (GR) [Entered: 12/16/2010 08:28 AM]
12/17/2010  4 
3 pg, 44.04 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 12/17/2010. [7584873] (CDM) [Entered: 12/17/2010 02:04 PM]
01/03/2011  5 
5 pg, 50.71 KB
Filed order MEDIATION (EPM): The Mediation Program of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals facilitates settlement while appeals are pending. See Fed. R. App. P. 33 and Ninth Cir. R. 33-1. The court has scheduled a telephone settlement assessment conference, with counsel only, on January 31, 2011, at 2:00 p.m. PACIFIC (San Francisco) Time to discuss whether this case is appropriate for participation in the Mediation Program. [7597952] (WL) [Entered: 01/03/2011 03:08 PM]
01/04/2011  6 Mail returned on 12/23/2010 addressed to Paul Neuharth, Jr. for Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, re: 12/16/10 Time Schedule Order. Resending to: 1140 Union Street, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92101. [7599036] (RL) [Entered: 01/04/2011 11:24 AM]
01/12/2011  7 Mail returned on 01/12/2011 addressed to Paul Neuharth, Jr. for Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, re: 01/03/11 Order Setting assessment Conference. Resending to: PAUL NEUHARTH, JR 1140 Union Street, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92101. [7609639] (RL) [Entered: 01/12/2011 01:21 PM]
01/31/2011  8 
1 pg, 22.88 KB
Filed order MEDIATION (PWS): The court has determined that this appeal will not be selected for inclusion in the Mediation Program. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant further settlement discussions while the appeal is pending. [7630833] (SM) [Entered: 01/31/2011 03:31 PM]
03/03/2011  9 
15 pg, 389.74 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion to extend time to file Opening brief until 05/23/2011. Date of service: 03/03/2011. [7667356] (CDM) [Entered: 03/03/2011 02:52 PM]
03/07/2011  10 
1 pg, 23.48 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk:AMT): Appellants’ unopposed motion for a 60-day extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due May 23, 2011. The answering brief is due July 22, 2011. The optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the answering brief. [7670207] (SM) [Entered: 03/07/2011 09:57 AM]
04/21/2011  11 
7 pg, 415.66 KB
Received non party letter dated 04/19/2011 from attorney Allan J. Mayer re: This letter is written as a Friend of the Court. It is a suggestion to Aid this Court. [7727030] (RL) [Entered: 04/22/2011 02:47 PM]
04/25/2011  12 
30 pg, 1.89 MB
Filed non party request from attorney Allan J. Mayer to file amicus brief. Dated April 21, 2011. [7730593] (RL) [Entered: 04/26/2011 01:43 PM]
05/23/2011  13 
143 pg, 1.96 MB
Submitted (ECF) Opening brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 05/23/2011. [7761939] (CDM) [Entered: 05/23/2011 11:47 PM]
05/24/2011  14 
1 pg, 80.92 KB
Filed clerk order: The opening brief [13] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a blue cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7762378] (SLH) [Entered: 05/24/2011 10:33 AM]
05/24/2011  15 
24 pg, 909.06 KB
Received Appellants’ notice of filing under seal sections of excerpts of record, volumes 6-8, pursuant to protective orders (attached). [7763342] (LA) [Entered: 05/24/2011 03:55 PM]
05/24/2011  16 Filed Appellants’ excerpts of record in 8 volumes (Vols. 6-8 FILED UNDER SEAL). Served on 05/23/2011. [7763345] (LA) [Entered: 05/24/2011 03:56 PM]
05/25/2011  17 
42 pg, 6.14 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY, INC.. Date of service: 05/25/2011. [7763613]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief (cover). Resent NDA. 05/25/2011 by RY] (SPH) [Entered: 05/25/2011 07:06 AM]
05/25/2011  18 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Congress of Racial Equality. [7764840] (LA) [Entered: 05/25/2011 03:30 PM]
05/25/2011  19 
2 pg, 81.67 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [17] submitted by Congress of Racial Equality is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7764842] (LA) [Entered: 05/25/2011 03:31 PM]
05/27/2011  20 
33 pg, 295.2 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by National Rifle Association of America, Inc.. Date of service: 05/27/2011. [7767051] (PDC) [Entered: 05/27/2011 12:16 PM]
05/27/2011  21 Received 7 paper copies of Opening brief [13] filed by Appellants. [7767195] (SD) [Entered: 05/27/2011 01:57 PM]
05/27/2011  22 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae NRA. [7767334] (LA) [Entered: 05/27/2011 02:37 PM]
05/27/2011  23 
2 pg, 81.24 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [20] submitted by NRA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7767335] (LA) [Entered: 05/27/2011 02:37 PM]
05/30/2011  24 
37 pg, 324.11 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association. Independence Institute. Date of service: 05/30/2011. [7767759] (DK) [Entered: 05/30/2011 05:03 PM]
05/31/2011  25 
4 pg, 40.12 KB
Filed (ECF) Errata to Amicus Brief ([20] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ). Filed by Amicus Curiae NRA. Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7768097] (PDC) [Entered: 05/31/2011 10:14 AM]
05/31/2011  26 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae ILEETA and Independence Institute. [7768222] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 10:46 AM]
05/31/2011  27 
2 pg, 81.31 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [24] submitted by Independence Institute and ILEETA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7768224] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 10:47 AM]
05/31/2011  28 
32 pg, 181.83 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, and Brett Stewart. Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7768686] (AG) [Entered: 05/31/2011 02:01 PM]
05/31/2011  29 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards and Brett Stewart. [7768971] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 03:11 PM]
05/31/2011  30 
2 pg, 81.29 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [28] submitted by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7768976] (LA) [Entered: 05/31/2011 03:12 PM]
05/31/2011  31 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [17] filed by Congress of Racial Equality. [7769002] (SD) [Entered: 05/31/2011 03:17 PM]
05/31/2011  32 
19 pg, 59.95 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence; Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership; Law Enforcement Alliance of America. Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7769312] (JCE) [Entered: 05/31/2011 05:03 PM]
05/31/2011  33 
122 pg, 2.37 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Gun Owners of California and Senator H. L. Richardson (Ret.). Date of service: 05/31/2011. [7769386] (DK) [Entered: 05/31/2011 07:53 PM]
06/01/2011  34 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO, LEAA, Gun Owners of California and Senator H. L. Richardson (Retired). [7769701] (LA) [Entered: 06/01/2011 09:43 AM]
06/01/2011  35 
2 pg, 81.6 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [32] submitted by Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO and LEAA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7769706] (LA) [Entered: 06/01/2011 09:44 AM]
06/01/2011  36 
2 pg, 81.57 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [33] submitted by Senator H. L. Richardson (Retired) and Gun Owners of California is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7769709] (LA) [Entered: 06/01/2011 09:46 AM]
06/02/2011  37 
5 pg, 52.85 KB
Filed (ECF) Errata to Amicus Brief ([33] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ). Filed by Amici Curiae H. L. Richardson and The Gun Owners of California. Date of service: 06/02/2011. [7771543] (DK) [Entered: 06/02/2011 02:48 PM]
06/02/2011  38 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [33] filed by H. L. Richardson and The Gun Owners of California. [7772511] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 10:04 AM]
06/03/2011  39 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [24] filed by Independence Institute and ILEETA. [7773729] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 03:06 PM]
06/03/2011  40 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [28] filed by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart. [7773893] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 03:36 PM]
06/03/2011  41 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [20] filed by NRA. [7773924] (SD) [Entered: 06/03/2011 03:39 PM]
06/06/2011  42 
4 pg, 72.25 KB
Filed (ECF) Errata to Opening Brief ([13] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ). Filed by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 06/06/2011. [7775088]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected cover page. Resent NDA. 06/06/2011 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 06/06/2011 12:15 PM]
06/07/2011  43 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [32] filed by Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO and LEAA. [7776750] (SD) [Entered: 06/07/2011 11:53 AM]
06/08/2011  44 
19 pg, 108.86 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion for miscellaneous relief [Appellants’ Opposition to Richards v. Prieto Appellants Motion to Align Oral Argument With Relate Case, Filed In Case No. 11-16255]. Date of service: 06/08/2011. [7778889] (CDM) [Entered: 06/08/2011 03:59 PM]
06/17/2011  45 
1 pg, 22.42 KB
Filed order MEDIATION (PWS): The briefing schedule previously set by the court is reset as follows: appellees shall file an answering brief on or before August 12, 2011; appellants may file an optional reply brief on or before September 6, 2011. [7789330] (SM) [Entered: 06/17/2011 10:58 AM]
06/20/2011  46 
2 pg, 24.75 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GSS): Appellants Adam Richards, et al.’s opposed motion to align No. 10-56971 and 11-16255 for oral argument is denied. However, these cases shall be calendared before the same panel if practicable. The briefing schedule established on March 7, 2011 shall remain in effect for No. 10-56971. The briefing schedule established on May 19, 2011 shall remain in effect for No. 11-16255. [7790569] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 06/20/2011 09:06 AM]
07/08/2011  47 
63 pg, 578.43 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 07/08/2011. [7813793] (CDM) [Entered: 07/08/2011 04:56 PM]
08/12/2011  48 
36 pg, 105.45 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brady Center To Prevent Gun Violence, The International Brotherhood of Police Officers, and The Police Foundation. Date of service: 08/12/2011. [7856018] (NRO) [Entered: 08/12/2011 01:33 PM]
08/12/2011  49 
51 pg, 482.29 KB
Submitted (ECF) Answering brief for review. Submitted by Appellee William D. Gore. Date of service: 08/12/2011. [7856366] (JC) [Entered: 08/12/2011 02:48 PM]
08/12/2011  50 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation. [7856538] (LA) [Entered: 08/12/2011 03:35 PM]
08/12/2011  51 
2 pg, 81.88 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [48] submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7856541] (LA) [Entered: 08/12/2011 03:36 PM]
08/12/2011  52 
1 pg, 80.67 KB
Filed clerk order: The answering brief [49] submitted by County of San Diego and William D. Gore is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a red cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7856692] (SLH) [Entered: 08/12/2011 04:41 PM]
08/16/2011  53 Received 7 paper copies of Answering brief [49] filed by County of San Diego and William D. Gore. [7860106] (SD) [Entered: 08/16/2011 02:49 PM]
08/18/2011  54 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [48] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation. [7863236] (SD) [Entered: 08/18/2011 02:40 PM]
08/19/2011  55 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY: Correct Entry [59]. Original Text: Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by California State Sheriff’s Association; California Police Chiefs Association and California Peace Officer’s Association. Date of service: 08/19/2011. [7863959] (PRC) [Entered: 08/19/2011 09:30 AM]
08/19/2011  56 
44 pg, 240.01 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Legal Community Against Violence, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, and San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon. Date of service: 08/19/2011. [7865007] (SJF) [Entered: 08/19/2011 04:32 PM]
08/23/2011  57 Entered appearance of 1) Amici Curiae: Legal Community Against Violence, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Association of Prosecuting Attorneys and George Gascon; 2) Amici Curiae – Pending: California State Sheriff’s Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California Peace Officers Association. [7868186] (LA) [Entered: 08/23/2011 04:13 PM]
08/23/2011  58 
2 pg, 82.25 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [56] submitted by Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, George Gascon, Legal Community Against Violence and Major Cities Chiefs Association is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a green cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7868191] (LA) [Entered: 08/23/2011 04:16 PM]
08/24/2011  59 
14 pg, 602.4 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by The California State sheriff’s Association; The California Police Chiefs Association; California Peace Officers Association. Date of service: 08/24/2011. [7868845] (PRC) [Entered: 08/24/2011 11:05 AM]
08/24/2011  60 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [56] filed by Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, et al. [7870195] (SD) [Entered: 08/25/2011 08:53 AM]
08/29/2011  61 
1 pg, 24.48 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AMT): The motion of the California State Sherriff’s Association (“CSSA”), the California Police Chiefs Associations (“CPCA”), and the California Peace Officers Association (“CPOA”) (collectively “Applicants”) for leave to file an amicus brief is granted. Within seven days of the filing of this order, Applicants are ordered to file seven copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Any further motion to file amicus curiae briefs shall be treated in the same fashion. [7874649] (WL) [Entered: 08/29/2011 01:20 PM]
08/29/2011  62 
1 pg, 24.68 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AMT): This order amends the August 29, 2011 order of the court. The motion of the California State Sherriff’s Association (“CSSA”), the California Police Chiefs Associations (“CPCA”), and the California Peace Officers Association (“CPOA”) (collectively “Applicants”) for leave to file an amicus brief, the proposed amicus brief, and any other related filings are referred to the merits panel for consideration. Within seven days of the filing of this order, Applicants are ordered to file seven copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Any further motion to file amicus curiae briefs shall be treated in the same fashion. [7875263] (WL) [Entered: 08/29/2011 03:56 PM]
08/30/2011  63 
3 pg, 121.39 KB
Filed (ECF) Amici Curiae – Pending California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 08/30/2011. [7875552]–[COURT UPDATE: Replaced PDF of corporate disclosure statement (searchable). Resent NDA. 08/30/2011 by TW] (PRC) [Entered: 08/30/2011 09:11 AM]
08/30/2011  64 COURT DELETED DUPLICATE ENTRY. Correct Entry: [63]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amici Curiae – Pending California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 08/30/2011. [7875593] (PRC) [Entered: 08/30/2011 09:23 AM]
09/01/2011  65 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus brief [59] filed by California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association. [7880655] (DB) [Entered: 09/02/2011 11:00 AM]
09/06/2011  66 
41 pg, 176.57 KB
Submitted (ECF) Reply brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 09/06/2011. [7883641] (CDM) [Entered: 09/06/2011 10:11 PM]
09/07/2011  67 
1 pg, 80.67 KB
Filed clerk order: The reply brief [66] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, with a gray cover, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. [7884675] (RH) [Entered: 09/07/2011 02:15 PM]
09/09/2011  68 Received 7 paper copies of Reply brief [66] filed by appellants. [7888429] (SD) [Entered: 09/09/2011 03:45 PM]
10/19/2011  69 
2 pg, 109.68 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellant Edward Peruta Correspondence: Letter regarding Second Notice of Appearance. Date of service: 10/19/2011 [7934900] (PDC) [Entered: 10/19/2011 03:06 PM]
10/19/2011  70 Added attorney Paul D. Clement for California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation Edward Peruta Mark Cleary Leslie Buncher Michelle Laxson James Dodd. [7934937] (RL) [Entered: 10/19/2011 03:12 PM]
10/20/2011  71 
2 pg, 93.3 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/20/2011. [7935787] (PDC) [Entered: 10/20/2011 10:56 AM]
10/24/2011  72 
18 pg, 138.05 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/24/2011. [7939320] (CDM) [Entered: 10/24/2011 12:19 PM]
10/27/2011  73 
3 pg, 61.64 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/27/2011. [7944202] (JC) [Entered: 10/27/2011 08:18 AM]
11/02/2011  74 
3 pg, 203.26 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/02/2011. [7951964] (CDM) [Entered: 11/02/2011 03:22 PM]
11/07/2011  75 
15 pg, 267.97 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/07/2011. [7957471] (CDM) [Entered: 11/07/2011 04:21 PM]
12/16/2011  76 
5 pg, 248.33 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/16/2011. [8004194] (CDM) [Entered: 12/16/2011 04:39 PM]
12/20/2011  77 
2 pg, 29.21 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): The court stays proceedings in this appeal pending this court’s en banc decision in Nordyke v. King, No. 07-15763, 2011 WL 5928130 (9th Cir. Nov. 28, 2011) (granting rehearing en banc). [8006308] (SM) [Entered: 12/20/2011 10:36 AM]
01/03/2012  78 
20 pg, 146.39 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta motion for reconsideration of non-dispositive Clerk Order of 12/20/2011. Date of service: 01/03/2012. [8018028] (CDM) [Entered: 01/03/2012 04:30 PM]
01/24/2012  79 
1 pg, 28.06 KB
Filed order (Appellate Commissioner) The en banc decision in Nordyke v. King, No. 07-15763 may contain legal analysis that would assist in the resolution of this appeal. Accordingly, appellants’ motion for reconsideration of the December 20, 2011 order staying this appeal pending the en banc decision in Nordyke is denied. (Appellate Commissioner) [8043254] (SM) [Entered: 01/24/2012 03:48 PM]
03/07/2012  80 
11 pg, 579.03 KB
Received letter dated 03/05/2012 from non-party attorney Allan J. Mayer re: This letter is written as a friend ofthe court. It is a suggestion to aid this court by the use of empirical statistical analysis as relevant to resolving 2nd Amendment issues. [8096406] (RL) [Entered: 03/08/2012 03:18 PM]
03/08/2012  81 
14 pg, 296.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/08/2012. [8096637] (CDM) [Entered: 03/08/2012 04:23 PM]
03/09/2012  82 
14 pg, 305.17 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/09/2012. [8098546] (CDM) [Entered: 03/09/2012 05:17 PM]
04/19/2012  83 
21 pg, 905.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 04/19/2012. [8146967] (CDM) [Entered: 04/19/2012 05:19 PM]
05/18/2012  84 
21 pg, 163.06 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 05/18/2012. [8184252] (CDM) [Entered: 05/18/2012 03:41 PM]
05/22/2012  85 
4 pg, 29.84 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore response opposing motion (,motion to lift stay). Date of service: 05/22/2012. [8186780] (JC) [Entered: 05/22/2012 11:14 AM]
05/25/2012  86 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [87]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8191708] (CDM) [Entered: 05/25/2012 10:32 AM]
05/25/2012  87 
6 pg, 75.1 KB
COURT-ENTERED FILING (to replace [86] with correct filing type). Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta reply to response (motion to lift stay). Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8192084] (ASW) [Entered: 05/25/2012 12:16 PM]
06/01/2012  88 
18 pg, 408.4 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/01/2012. [8199885] (CDM) [Entered: 06/01/2012 04:56 PM]
06/19/2012  89 
1 pg, 23.27 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GS): The appellants’ motion to lift the stay of appellate proceedings in No. 11- 16255 is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in No. 11-16255. [8220426] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 06/19/2012 03:32 PM]
06/25/2012  90 
1 pg, 22.82 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM) Appellants’ motion for relief from stay is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in this docket. Briefing is complete. This appeal is ready for calendaring. [8226655] (SM) [Entered: 06/25/2012 01:35 PM]
07/10/2012  91 
22 pg, 128.23 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Appellants’ Notice of Additional Related Cases and Status Thereof. Date of service: 07/10/2012 [8244725]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected notice. Resent NDA. 07/12/2012 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 07/10/2012 04:37 PM]
07/10/2012  92 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [91]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Notice of Errata to Appellants’ Notice of Additional Related Cases and Status Thereof. Date of service: 07/10/2012 [8244821] (CDM) [Entered: 07/10/2012 05:17 PM]
09/14/2012  93 
7 pg, 109.59 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion For Clarification & Coordination of Appeals In Related Cases]. Date of service: 09/14/2012. [8325030] (CDM) [Entered: 09/14/2012 04:52 PM]
09/24/2012  94 
2 pg, 26.41 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): Pursuant to the Motion for Clarification & Coordination of Appeals in Related Cases filed by Appellants in 10-56971, it is hereby ORDERED that arguments in 10-56971, 11-16255, and 12-16258 will be scheduled to be heard by the same panel on the same day. The date and time of the arguments will be determined in due course by subsequent order. [8335002] [10-56971, 11-16255, 12-16258] (SM) [Entered: 09/24/2012 02:41 PM]
10/09/2012  95 
10 pg, 449.97 KB
Notice of Oral Argument on Thursday, December 6, 2012 – 9:00 AM – Courtroom 1, 3rd Floor – James R. Browning US Courthouse – San Francisco, CA. Please return ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HEARING NOTICE form to: SAN FRANCISCO Office. Please open attached documents to view details about your case. [8352267] (RB) [Entered: 10/09/2012 12:52 PM]
10/09/2012  96 
2 pg, 80.13 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney James Chapin, Esquire for Appellees William D. Gore and County of San Diego. [8352408] (JC) [Entered: 10/09/2012 01:27 PM]
10/09/2012  97 
13 pg, 350.62 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): These appeals have been assigned to the same panel because they involve issues regarding the Second Amendment. The cases are not consolidated for oral argument. Counsel may wish to confer in order to enhance oral argument. The Clerk shall serve a copy of the court’s service list for each case on all parties. [8353131] [10-56971, 11-16255, 12-16258] (SM) [Entered: 10/09/2012 04:36 PM]
10/10/2012  98 
10 pg, 144.83 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Paul D. Clement for Amicus Curiae NRA and Appellants Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation. [8353541] (PDC) [Entered: 10/10/2012 09:09 AM]
10/11/2012  99 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY per request from filer (co-counsel for appellant already filed acknowledgement of hearing notice [98]. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Paul Henry Neuharth, Jr. for Appellants Edward Peruta, Michelle Laxson, James Dodd, Leslie Buncher, Mark Cleary and California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation. [8357338] (PHN) [Entered: 10/11/2012 04:47 PM]
10/17/2012  100 
1 pg, 56.47 KB
Filed Appellees County of San Diego and William D. Gore additional citations. Served on 10/15/2012. (panel) [8365457] (RL) [Entered: 10/17/2012 03:49 PM]
11/07/2012  101 
17 pg, 325.43 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/07/2012. [8392999] (CDM) [Entered: 11/07/2012 04:56 PM]
11/29/2012  102 
1 pg, 27.16 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): At oral argument, the parties should be prepared to discuss the significance, if any, of the absence of the State of California in this appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2403; Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1. [8419330] (SM) [Entered: 11/29/2012 10:13 AM]
11/30/2012  103 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Allen J. Mayer. [8421778] (WP) [Entered: 11/30/2012 03:16 PM]
11/30/2012  104 
10 pg, 521.68 KB
Received original and 7 copies of Amicus Curiae Allen J. Mayer brief in 4 pages. Served on: 04/02/2012. Major deficiencies:motion required to file an amicus brief. [8421821] (WP) [Entered: 11/30/2012 03:24 PM]
12/03/2012  105 
2 pg, 74.31 KB
Filed Appellees County of San Diego and William D. Gore additional citations. Served on 11/29/2012. (panel) [8423646] (RL) [Entered: 12/03/2012 04:40 PM]
12/05/2012  106 
3 pg, 273.91 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/05/2012. [8426271] (PDC) [Entered: 12/05/2012 11:23 AM]
12/06/2012  107 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN. [8428091] (RB) [Entered: 12/06/2012 12:02 PM]
12/11/2012  108 
3 pg, 163.51 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/11/2012. [8434734] (PDC) [Entered: 12/11/2012 04:35 PM]
03/29/2013  109 
1 pg, 56.33 KB
Filed Appellees additional citations. no proof of service. (panel) [8571766] (JFF) [Entered: 04/01/2013 11:09 AM]
04/30/2013  110 
11 pg, 836.09 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 04/30/2013. [8610109]–[COURT UPDATE: Replaced PDF (to include COS), resent notice. 05/01/2013 by ASW] (PDC) [Entered: 04/30/2013 01:40 PM]
09/13/2013  111 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [112]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 09/13/2013. [8781557] (CDM) [Entered: 09/13/2013 12:17 PM]
09/13/2013  112 
15 pg, 290.02 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 09/13/2013. [8781590] (CDM) [Entered: 09/13/2013 12:29 PM]
12/06/2013  113 
60 pg, 595.12 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/06/2013. [8891788] (CDM) [Entered: 12/06/2013 10:09 AM]
02/12/2014  114 
1 pg, 32.87 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN)The Motion and Application for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief on Behalf of Appellees County of San Diego, et al, filed with this court on August 19, 2011, by the California State Sheriffs Association, the California Police Chiefs Association, and the California Peace Officers Association, is GRANTED. [8977187] (SM) [Entered: 02/12/2014 04:55 PM]
02/12/2014  115 
1 pg, 83.05 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [59] submitted by California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association and California State Sheriff’s Association is filed. No additional paper copies of the brief are required. [8977252] (LA) [Entered: 02/12/2014 05:55 PM]
02/13/2014  116 
132 pg, 884.53 KB
FILED OPINION (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) REVERSED AND REMANDED. Judge: DFO Authoring, Judge: SRT Dissenting, FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [8977540] (RP) [Entered: 02/13/2014 09:50 AM]
02/18/2014  117 
3 pg, 43.78 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Correspondence re Counsel Listing in Published Opinion. Date of service: 02/18/2014 [8981119] (CDM) [Entered: 02/18/2014 11:29 AM]
02/21/2014  118 
2 pg, 60.92 KB
Copy of letter received from Bobie K. Ross for aplt Peruta, response to 2/18/14 letter re counsel listed in opinion. [8989604] (CW) [Entered: 02/24/2014 12:14 PM]
02/26/2014  119 
1 pg, 29.54 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore Correspondence: Request to correct published opinion.. Date of service: 02/26/2014 [8993802] (JC) [Entered: 02/26/2014 01:08 PM]
02/26/2014  120 
4 pg, 69.98 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta bill of costs (Form 10) in the amount of $1,280.80 USD. Date of service: 02/26/2014 [8994696] (CDM) [Entered: 02/26/2014 05:04 PM]
02/27/2014  121 
77 pg, 4.98 MB
Filed (ECF) Amici Curiae California Peace Officers Association and California Police Chiefs Association petition for rehearing en banc (from 02/13/2014 opinion). Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996109]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached searchable version of petition. Resent NDA. 02/27/2014 by RY] (PRC) [Entered: 02/27/2014 02:37 PM]
02/27/2014  122 
184 pg, 1.26 MB
Filed (ECF) State of California Petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc, Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing, Motion to stay the mandate, and Motion to intervene. Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996638]–[COURT UPDATE: Removed Application for Exemption under 9th Cir. R. 46-5 (counsel notified must be refiled separately via Appellate ECF). Edited docket text to reflect content of filing. Resent NDA. 02/28/2014 by RY] (GDB) [Entered: 02/27/2014 04:41 PM]
02/27/2014  123 
191 pg, 33.03 MB
Filed (ECF) Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence Motion to intervene. Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996736]–[COURT UPDATE: Edited docket text to reflect content of filing (motion only, no brief). 04/02/2015 by RY] (NRO) [Entered: 02/27/2014 06:49 PM]
02/27/2014  124 COURT DELETED DUPLICATE ENTRY. Resubmitted amicus brief using correct ECF event. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [133]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence petition for rehearing en banc (from 02/13/2014 opinion). Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8996737] (SJF) [Entered: 02/27/2014 06:49 PM]
02/27/2014  133 
136 pg, 541.39 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus Brief for review. Submitted by Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence. Date of service: 02/27/2014. [8999469]–[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [124].] (RY) [Entered: 03/03/2014 02:38 PM]
02/28/2014  125 
1 pg, 29.34 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 02/28/2014. [8997386] (NRO) [Entered: 02/28/2014 11:32 AM]
02/28/2014  126 
2 pg, 35.1 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence’s Motion to Extend Time for Filing a Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Stay the Issuance of the Mandate, and Proposed Intervenor State of California’s Motion to Extend Time to File a Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Stay Issuance of the Mandate, both filed with this Court on February 27, 2014, are GRANTED. Any proposed petitions for rehearing filed with this Court by February 27, 2014 will be considered timely if this Court grants the petitioners’ concurrently filed motions to intervene. This order does not extend the time for filing petitions for rehearing for any petitioner who did not move to intervene by February 27, 2014. Submission with respect to the pending motions to intervene is deferred pending further order of the Court. Issuance of the mandate is stayed pending further order of the Court. [8997978] (WL) [Entered: 02/28/2014 03:22 PM]
02/28/2014  127 Entered appearance of Intervenor – Pending State of California. [8998096] (MT) [Entered: 02/28/2014 03:48 PM]
02/28/2014  128 
2 pg, 411.37 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Ross C. Moody for Intervenor – Pending State of California. Date of service: 02/28/2014. [8998239] (RM) [Entered: 02/28/2014 04:32 PM]
02/28/2014  129 Added attorney Ross Moody for State of California, in case 10-56971. [8998245] (EL) [Entered: 02/28/2014 04:34 PM]
03/03/2014  130 
2 pg, 13.67 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Craig J. Konnoth for Intervenor – Pending State of California. Date of service: 03/03/2014. [8998809] (GDB) [Entered: 03/03/2014 10:38 AM]
03/03/2014  131 
7 pg, 148.59 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California Motion for 46-5 exemption. Date of service: 03/03/2014. [8998813] (GDB) [Entered: 03/03/2014 10:40 AM]
03/03/2014  132 Added attorney Craig Konnoth for State of California, in case 10-56971. [8999024] (CW) [Entered: 03/03/2014 11:54 AM]
03/05/2014  134 
30 pg, 156.29 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle. Date of service: 03/05/2014. [9003941] (SJF) [Entered: 03/05/2014 04:32 PM]
03/05/2014  135 
2 pg, 40.5 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Each party is each directed to file a response of no more than 6,000 words addressing the pending motions to intervene filed with this Court on February 27, 2014. Each response shall address: 1) Motion to Intervene by the State of California, 2) Motion for Leave to Intervene by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and 3) Petition for Rehearing En Banc by Amici Curiae California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association insofar as the Petition is a motion to intervene. See p. 2, n.2. The responses shall be filed within 21 days of this order. [9004006] (SM) [Entered: 03/05/2014 04:50 PM]
03/05/2014  136 
1 pg, 32.94 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) The Application for Exemption under Ninth Circuit Rule 46-5, filed by Craig J. Konnoth with this Court on March 3, 2014, is GRANTED. [9004014] (SM) [Entered: 03/05/2014 04:53 PM]
03/06/2014  137 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle. [9004425] (RL) [Entered: 03/06/2014 09:44 AM]
03/11/2014  138 
7 pg, 66.65 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion for miscellaneous relief [Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request; Declaration of Sean A. Brady In Support Thereof]. Date of service: 03/11/2014. [9011001] (CDM) [Entered: 03/11/2014 01:10 PM]
03/12/2014  139 
2 pg, 55.03 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Correspondence: Appellants Response to Appellees Counsel Listing in Published Opinion. Date of service: 03/12/2014 [9013284] (CDM) [Entered: 03/12/2014 03:23 PM]
03/13/2014  140 
3 pg, 94.33 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore Correspondence: Response re: request to correct published opinion. Date of service: 03/13/2014 [9015117] (JC) [Entered: 03/13/2014 03:07 PM]
03/14/2014  141 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [141]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer response to Party Case , Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) ,Motion (ECF Filing) motion to become amicus, Notice of Appearance (ECF Filing) , Corporate Disclosure Statement (ECF Filing). Date of service: 03/14/2014. [9016119]. (AJM) [Entered: 03/14/2014 11:20 AM]
03/14/2014  142 
6 pg, 1.09 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer. Date of service: 03/14/2014. (COURT-ENTERED Filing to replace incorrect entry by filer [141]). [9017247] (ASW) [Entered: 03/14/2014 04:29 PM]
03/17/2014  143 
10 pg, 31.01 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta response opposing motion (,motion to become amicus). Date of service: 03/17/2014. [9019487] (CDM) [Entered: 03/17/2014 06:02 PM]
03/20/2014  144 
6 pg, 48.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Legal Community Against Violence and Amicus Curiae – Pending Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle reply to response (, ). Date of service: 03/20/2014. [9024303] (SJF) [Entered: 03/20/2014 01:14 PM]
03/26/2014  145 
30 pg, 61.35 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta response opposing motion (motion to intervene). Date of service: 03/26/2014. [9033121]–[COURT UPDATE: Edited docket text to reflect content of filing. Resent NDA. 03/27/2014 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 03/26/2014 10:26 PM]
03/27/2014  146 
1 pg, 33.44 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Attorneys’ Fees Request is GRANTED. The deadline is extended until thirty days after the latest of: (1) the denial of all pending motions to intervene, (2) the denial of any properly filed petition for rehearing en banc, or (3) the filing of a disposition by an en banc panel. [9034369] (WL) [Entered: 03/27/2014 02:20 PM]
04/02/2014  147 
16 pg, 272.03 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California reply to response (, ,motion to intervene). Date of service: 04/02/2014. [9042130]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected reply (includes certificate of service). Resent NDA. 04/02/2014 by RY] (CK) [Entered: 04/02/2014 04:06 PM]
04/02/2014  148 
17 pg, 47.17 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence reply to response (,motion to intervene, ). Date of service: 04/02/2014. [9042383] (NRO) [Entered: 04/02/2014 05:59 PM]
04/03/2014  149 
1 pg, 37.46 KB
Filed Appellee William D. Gore letter dated 04/01/2014 re: Client has directed csl to not file anything further on appeal. No response regarding motions to intervene will be filed. Letter was submitted in paper format rather than ECF. PANEL . Paper filing deficiency: None. [9044210] (CW) [Entered: 04/04/2014 08:00 AM]
04/17/2014  150 
2 pg, 108.01 KB
Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer letter dated 04/10/2014 re: it is time for the Supreme Court to resolve this 2nd amendment issue. Paper filing deficiency: None. [9062526] (PANEL) (EL) [Entered: 04/17/2014 02:53 PM]
04/28/2014  151 
2 pg, 107.11 KB
Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer letter dated 04/10/2014 re: The judicial reasons for submitting opposition(PANEL). Paper filing deficiency: None. [9075848] (JFF) [Entered: 04/29/2014 09:38 AM]
05/01/2014  152 
2 pg, 44.67 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Appellee William D. Gore is ordered to notify this Court in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order of his position on the pending motions to intervene or that he takes no position. Appellee William D. Gore is further ordered to respond within fourteen days of the date of this order to the suggestion that this case is moot. See Opp’n to Pet. for Reh’g En Banc 16, Richards v. Prieto, No. 11-16255 (“Even were Peruta vacated tomorrow, neither this Court nor the state could do anything to keep Gore from printing permits to all otherwise-qualified comers. The Peruta dispute is moot.”). He shall explain any change in his policy that could affect this Court’s jurisdiction over this case. [9078973] (WL) [Entered: 05/01/2014 08:18 AM]
05/14/2014  153 
2 pg, 304.44 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore response to Court order dated 05/01/2014. Date of service: 05/14/2014. [9095344] (JC) [Entered: 05/14/2014 01:00 PM]
08/22/2014  154 
2 pg, 34.41 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California Correspondence: Notice of Departure of Craig J. Konnoth from the Department of Justice; Request to Remove Mr. Konnoth from Service List. Date of service: 08/22/2014 [9216673] (GDB) [Entered: 08/22/2014 05:43 PM]
08/25/2014  155 Terminated Craig Konnoth for State of California in 10-56971 [9216762] (CW) [Entered: 08/25/2014 07:33 AM]
11/12/2014  156 
20 pg, 119.57 KB
Filed Order for PUBLICATION (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) (Dissent by Judge Thomas) We must rule on motions to intervene in this Second Amendment case which were filed after our opinion and judgment reversing the District Court were filed. (SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT) The State of California’s Motion to Intervene is DENIED. The Brady Campaign’s Motion for Leave to Intervene is DENIED. CPCA and CPOA’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc, construed as a motion to intervene, is DENIED. [9308663] (RP) [Entered: 11/12/2014 06:58 AM]
11/26/2014  157 
64 pg, 480.12 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of California petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc (from 11/12/2014 opinion). Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329047] [10-56971] (GDB) [Entered: 11/26/2014 04:17 PM]
11/26/2014  158 
8 pg, 24.41 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion to join State of California petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc]. Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329149] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect content of filing. 11/28/2014 by TL] (JC) [Entered: 11/26/2014 04:56 PM]
11/26/2014  159 
9 pg, 234.93 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Unopposed Motion to extend time to comply with the order dated 03/27/2014. Date of service: 11/26/2014. [9329171] [10-56971] (CDM) [Entered: 11/26/2014 05:18 PM]
12/03/2014  160 
1 pg, 33.61 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) Plaintiff-Appellants are directed to file a response to Proposed Intervenor- Appellee’s petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc filed with this Court on November 26, 2014. The response shall not exceed thirty-five (35) pages, and shall be filed within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order. [9334888] (SM) [Entered: 12/03/2014 09:23 AM]
12/03/2014  161 
2 pg, 42.36 KB
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, SIDNEY R. THOMAS and CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN) A judge of this Court having made a sua sponte call for a vote on whether this case should be reheard en banc, the parties shall file, within 21 days from the date of this order, simultaneous briefs setting forth their respective positions on whether this case should be reheard en banc. See G.O. 5.4(c)(3). Amici curiae wishing to file briefs regarding whether this case should be reheard en banc may also do so within 21 days from the date of this order. Parties who are registered for ECF should file the brief electronically without submission of paper copies. Parties who are not registered ECF filers should submit the original brief plus 50 paper copies. [9336038] (SM) [Entered: 12/03/2014 03:47 PM]
12/08/2014  162 
14 pg, 58.98 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/08/2014. [9341224] [10-56971] (SJF) [Entered: 12/08/2014 04:03 PM]
12/08/2014  164 
10 pg, 389.35 KB
Received original and 3 copies of Amicus Curiae – Pending Allan Jerome Mayer brief in 3 pages. Served on: 12/03/2014. Major deficiencies: previous motion to become amicus pending. [9342842] (TH) [Entered: 12/09/2014 03:16 PM]
12/09/2014  163 
2 pg, 86.3 KB
ENTRY UPDATED. Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [162] submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 20 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9342774] –[Edited 12/09/2014 by TLH to correct number of copies] (TH) [Entered: 12/09/2014 02:59 PM]
12/12/2014  165 Received 20 paper copies of Amicus brief [162] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. [9348865] (TH) [Entered: 12/15/2014 10:00 AM]
12/17/2014  166 
26 pg, 806.56 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Sheriff Ed Prieto and County of Yolo. Date of service: 12/17/2014. [9352960] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/18/2014 by TL] (JAW) [Entered: 12/17/2014 11:49 AM]
12/18/2014  167 
1 pg, 28.64 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Kathryn Linde Marshall for Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/18/2014. [9354572] [10-56971] (KLM) [Entered: 12/18/2014 10:27 AM]
12/18/2014  168 Added attorney Kathryn Linde Marshall for Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in case 10-56971. [9354584] (JFF) [Entered: 12/18/2014 10:31 AM]
12/18/2014  169 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Edward G. Prieto and County of Yolo. [9355053] (TH) [Entered: 12/18/2014 01:51 PM]
12/18/2014  170 
1 pg, 83.41 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [166] submitted by County of Yolo and Sheriff Edward G. Prieto is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9355057] (TH) [Entered: 12/18/2014 01:52 PM]
12/22/2014  171 COURT DELETED DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [172]. Original Text: Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9358313] [10-56971] (KLM) [Entered: 12/22/2014 01:05 PM]
12/22/2014  172 
161 pg, 1.34 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9358350] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/23/2014 by TL] (KLM) [Entered: 12/22/2014 01:12 PM]
12/22/2014  173 
20 pg, 96.58 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9358991] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/23/2014 by TL] (MJM) [Entered: 12/22/2014 03:47 PM]
12/22/2014  174 
31 pg, 1.05 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by State of Hawaii. Date of service: 12/22/2014. [9359324] [10-56971] (GDL) [Entered: 12/22/2014 05:36 PM]
12/23/2014  175 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae State of Hawaii, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Peace Officers’ Association. [9359657] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 09:53 AM]
12/23/2014  176 Terminated Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in 10-56971 to remove duplicate appearance from docket [9359668] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 09:57 AM]
12/23/2014  177 
1 pg, 82.97 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [174] submitted by State of Hawaii is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9359680] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 10:01 AM]
12/23/2014  178 
1 pg, 83.52 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [172] submitted by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9359698] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 10:06 AM]
12/23/2014  179 
6 pg, 336.3 KB
Submitted (ECF) Supplemental Brief for review. Submitted by Appellee William D. Gore. Date of service: 12/23/2014. [9359744] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 12/23/2014 by TL] (JC) [Entered: 12/23/2014 10:17 AM]
12/23/2014  180 
1 pg, 83.19 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [173] submitted by California Peace Officers’ Association and California Police Chiefs’ Association is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9359973] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 11:22 AM]
12/23/2014  181 
26 pg, 198.07 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 12/23/2014. [9360467] [10-56971] (SJF) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:31 PM]
12/23/2014  182 
1 pg, 83.02 KB
Filed clerk order: The supplemental brief [179] submitted by William D. Gore is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9360473] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:34 PM]
12/23/2014  183 
1 pg, 83.49 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [181] submitted by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9360495] (TH) [Entered: 12/23/2014 02:41 PM]
12/24/2014  184 
22 pg, 404.76 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC.; FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, INC.; CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, INC.; PINK PISTOLS; GUN RIGHTS ACROSS AMERICA; LIBERAL GUN OWNERS ASSOCIATION; MADISON SOCIETY, INC.; HAWAII DEFENSE FOUNDATION; FLORIDA CARRY, INC.; ILLINOIS CARRY; KNIFE RIGHTS FOUNDATION, INC.; AND SECOND AMENDMENT PLAINTIFFS OPPOSING REHEARING EN BANC. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9361729] [10-56971] (BAB) [Entered: 12/24/2014 12:02 PM]
12/24/2014  185 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. [9361942] (TH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 01:57 PM]
12/24/2014  186 
1 pg, 83.01 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [184] submitted by Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. is filed. Pursuant to the order filed on December 3, 2014, no paper copies of the brief are required. [9361947] (TH) [Entered: 12/24/2014 02:00 PM]
12/24/2014  187 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Incorrect ECF filing. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [191]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Edward Peruta and Michelle Laxson response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc, Combo PFR Panel and En Banc for panel and en banc rehearing, for panel and en banc rehearing (statistical entry). Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362366]. [10-56971] (CDM) [Entered: 12/24/2014 05:17 PM]
12/24/2014  188 
25 pg, 304.29 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Edward Peruta and Michelle Laxson response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc, Combo PFR Panel and En Banc for panel and en banc rehearing, for panel and en banc rehearing (statistical entry). Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362396]. [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect content of filing. 12/26/2014 by TL] (CDM) [Entered: 12/24/2014 06:21 PM]
12/24/2014  189 
26 pg, 155.51 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Adam Richards, Brett Stewart, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Calguns Foundation, Inc.. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362399] [10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 12/24/2014 06:32 PM]
12/24/2014  191 
30 pg, 544.33 KB
Submitted (ECF) Supplemental Brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta. Date of service: 12/24/2014. [9362594] –[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [187] .] (TYL) [Entered: 12/26/2014 11:32 AM]
12/26/2014  190 
1 pg, 85.61 KB
Filed clerk order: The amici brief [189] submitted by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart is filed. No paper copies required per the Court’s 12/3/14 order. [9362541] (GV) [Entered: 12/26/2014 10:58 AM]
12/26/2014  192 
1 pg, 85.41 KB
Filed clerk order: The supplemental brief [191] submitted by Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta is filed. No paper copies required per the Court’s 12/3/14 order. [9362627] (GV) [Entered: 12/26/2014 11:59 AM]
03/26/2015  193 
1 pg, 45 KB
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 opinion and order denying motions to intervene shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.[9473535] (RP) [Entered: 03/26/2015 12:53 PM]
03/26/2015  194 
2 pg, 48.88 KB
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 supplemental and 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. [9473833] (SM) [Entered: 03/26/2015 02:42 PM]
03/30/2015  195 Received 25 paper copies of Answering brief [49] filed by William D. Gore. (for en banc court) [9476926] (TH) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:45 PM]
03/30/2015  196 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [56] filed by Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, George Gascon, Legal Community Against Violence and Major Cities Chiefs Association. (for en banc court) [9476939] (TH) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:49 PM]
04/01/2015  197 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [33] filed by H. L. Richardson and The Gun Owners of California. (for en banc court) [9480034] (TH) [Entered: 04/01/2015 10:56 AM]
04/01/2015  198 Received 25 paper copies of Errata to Amicus brief [37] filed by H. L. Richardson and The Gun Owners of California. (for en banc court) [9480052] (TH) [Entered: 04/01/2015 11:02 AM]
04/01/2015  199 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [184] filed by Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc, et al. (for en banc court) [9480255] (TH) [Entered: 04/01/2015 12:09 PM]
04/01/2015  200 
2 pg, 43.78 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) These appeals are consolidated for rehearing en banc. [9480674] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:38 PM]
04/01/2015  201 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [59] filed by California Peace Officers’ Association, California Police Chiefs’ Association and California Sherrifs’ Association. (sent to en banc court) [9481087]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/01/2015 04:44 PM]
04/02/2015  202 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [32] filed by Center For Constitutional Jurisprudence, DRGO and LEAA. (sent to en banc court) [9481499]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 10:04 AM]
04/02/2015  203 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [48] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Police Foundation. (sent to en banc court) [9481579]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 10:35 AM]
04/02/2015  204 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [17] filed by Congress of Racial Equality. (sent to en banc court) [9481624]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 10:51 AM]
04/02/2015  205 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [24] filed by Independence Institute and ILEETA. (sent to en banc court) [9481647]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:00 AM]
04/02/2015  206 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [20] filed by NRA. (sent to en banc court) [9481684]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:10 AM]
04/02/2015  207 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [28] filed by Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and Brett Stewart. (sent to en banc court) [9481727]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:23 AM]
04/02/2015  208 Ordered electronic copies of appellants excerpts of record. [9481755] (SOS) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:31 AM]
04/02/2015  209 Received 25 paper copies of Reply brief [66] filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9481765]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:32 AM]
04/02/2015  210 Received 25 paper copies of 28(j) letters [47], [71], [72], [75], [82], [83], [101], [106], [108], [110], [112], [113] (bound together in one volume) filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9481831]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 12:09 PM]
04/02/2015  211 Received 25 paper copies of Errata to Opening brief [42] filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9481856]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 12:25 PM]
04/02/2015  212 Received 25 paper copies of Motion to intervene [123] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482133]–[Edited: Unapplied entry from 11-16255 (cases consolidated for rehearing only.) 04/02/2015 by RY] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:16 PM]
04/02/2015  213 Received 26 paper copies of Reply to appellants’ opposition to motion to intervene [148] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482170] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:27 PM]
04/02/2015  214 Received 25 paper copies of Motion to join State of Caifornia petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc [158], [158] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482213] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:36 PM]
04/02/2015  215 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus motion and brief [134], [134], [134] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Robert T. Doyle. (sent to en banc court) [9482260] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:51 PM]
04/02/2015  216 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [172] filed by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482302] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 03:00 PM]
04/02/2015  217 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [162] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482332] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 03:07 PM]
04/02/2015  218 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [181] filed by Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9482352] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 03:12 PM]
04/02/2015  219 Received 26 paper copies of Motion to intervene [122], [122] filed by State of California. (sent to en banc court) [9482610] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 04:30 PM]
04/02/2015  220 Received 26 paper copies of Reply to appellant’s opposition to motion to intervene [147] filed by State of California. (sent to en banc court) [9482630] (TH) [Entered: 04/02/2015 04:40 PM]
04/03/2015  221 
9 pg, 23.24 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion for miscellaneous relief [Clarification on applicable deadline for amicus curiae to file briefs supporting Peruta Appellants]. Date of service: 04/03/2015. [9483124] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 11-16255. 04/03/2015 by TL] (CDM) [Entered: 04/03/2015 10:27 AM]
04/03/2015  222 Received 25 paper copies of Opening brief [13] filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9483202] (TH) [Entered: 04/03/2015 11:09 AM]
04/06/2015  223 
795 pg, 31.67 MB
Submitted (ECF) excerpts of record. Submitted by Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd and Michelle Laxson in 10-56971. Date of service: 05/24/2011. [9484821] –[COURT UPDATE: Edited docket text to reflect correct party filers (removed Appellant Calguns Foundation, Inc. in 11-16255). Unapplied filing from 11-16255 (filing for 10-56971 only). 04/07/2015 by RY] (CDM) [Entered: 04/06/2015 11:58 AM]
04/06/2015  224 
2 pg, 45.17 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion for clarification is granted. Any amicus briefs, either pertaining to the merits of the case or the denial of the intervention motion, shall be filed within 35 days of the entry of the order granting rehearing en banc. [9485015] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 04/06/2015 01:27 PM]
04/07/2015  226 
1 pg, 74.78 KB
Lodged Non-Party Armando Roman letter dated 4/3/15 re: Recent development in case. (casefiles) [9488580] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 04/08/2015 02:46 PM]
04/08/2015  225 Received 25 paper copies of excerpts of record [223] in 8 volumes (Volumes 6-8 UNDER SEAL) filed by appellants. (sent to en banc court) [9488520] (TH) [Entered: 04/08/2015 02:25 PM]
04/15/2015  228 
2 pg, 648.61 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Stefan B. Tahmassebi for Amicus Curiae Congress of Racial Equality in 10-56971. Date of service: 04/15/2015. [9496613] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SBT) [Entered: 04/15/2015 12:13 PM]
04/15/2015  229 Added attorney Stefan B. Tahmassebi for Congress of Racial Equality.. [9496757] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 04/15/2015 01:21 PM]
04/16/2015  230 
40 pg, 699.3 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by State of Hawaii. Date of service: 04/16/2015. [9499228] [10-56971, 11-16255] (GDL) [Entered: 04/16/2015 09:00 PM]
04/16/2015  232 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Charles Nichols. [9500411] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 03:30 PM]
04/16/2015  233 
9 pg, 334.24 KB
Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Charles Nichols motion to file amicus brief in support of neither party. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/15/2015. [9500416] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 03:33 PM]
04/16/2015  234 
22 pg, 830.32 KB
Received original and 17 copies of Amicus Curiae – Pending Charles Nichols amicus brief in 15 pages. Served on: 04/15/2015. Major deficiencies: motion to become amicus pending. (sent to en banc court) [9500477] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 03:51 PM]
04/17/2015  231 
2 pg, 189.36 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [230] submitted by State of Hawaii is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9499782] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/17/2015 11:09 AM]
04/20/2015  235 
1 pg, 30.47 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion of Charles Nichols for leave to file an amicus brief is GRANTED. [9501768] (SM) [Entered: 04/20/2015 02:17 PM]
04/20/2015  236 
22 pg, 834.33 KB
Filed original and 25 copies of Charles Nichols amicus brief of 15 pages. Served on 04/15/2015. [9502183] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/20/2015 04:50 PM]
04/21/2015  237 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [230] filed by State of Hawaii. (sent to en banc court) [9502771] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/21/2015 10:35 AM]
04/22/2015  238 
36 pg, 1.1 MB
Filed (ECF) Michael J. Vogler, Esq. Motion to intervene. Date of service: 04/22/2015. [9504505] [10-56971, 11-16255] (MJV) [Entered: 04/22/2015 10:30 AM]
04/22/2015  239 Entered appearance of Intervenor – Pending Michael John Vogler. [9504975] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 04/22/2015 01:38 PM]
04/28/2015  240 
25 pg, 90.62 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Pink Pistols, Women Against Gun Control, Inc., and Second Amendment Sisters. Date of service: 04/28/2015. [9517181] [10-56971, 11-16255] (BSK) [Entered: 04/28/2015 11:37 AM]
04/28/2015  241 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Pink Pistols, Women Against Gun Control, Inc. and Second Amendment Sisters. [9517590] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/28/2015 02:35 PM]
04/28/2015  242 
2 pg, 190.85 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [240] submitted by Pink Pistols, Second Amendment Sisters and Women Against Gun Control, Inc. is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9517626] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/28/2015 02:47 PM]
04/29/2015  243 
39 pg, 1.22 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Brief of Amicus Curiae League of California Cities in Support of Appellees. Date of service: 04/29/2015. [9519031] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TPP) [Entered: 04/29/2015 02:00 PM]
04/29/2015  244 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae League of California Cities. [9519111] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/29/2015 02:22 PM]
04/29/2015  245 
2 pg, 190.3 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [243] submitted by League of California Cities is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9519145] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/29/2015 02:28 PM]
04/30/2015  246 
23 pg, 263.21 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Governors of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9520228] [10-56971, 11-16255]–[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief (footnote font size). 04/30/2015 by RY] (ASO) [Entered: 04/30/2015 10:35 AM]
04/30/2015  247 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae Governors, States of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. [9520433] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/30/2015 11:30 AM]
04/30/2015  248 
2 pg, 190.4 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [246] submitted by Governors, States of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9520444] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/30/2015 11:33 AM]
04/30/2015  249 
41 pg, 426.74 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Congress of Racial Equality, Inc.. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9520549] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SBT) [Entered: 04/30/2015 12:20 PM]
04/30/2015  250 
2 pg, 191.03 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [249] submitted by Congress of Racial Equality, Inc. is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9520741] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/30/2015 01:41 PM]
04/30/2015  251 
26 pg, 82.27 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9520955] [10-56971] (ALB) [Entered: 04/30/2015 02:21 PM]
04/30/2015  252 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae State of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. [9521090] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/30/2015 02:44 PM]
04/30/2015  253 
2 pg, 190.56 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [251] submitted by State of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9521118] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 04/30/2015 02:47 PM]
04/30/2015  254 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Deficiencies. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [260]. Original Text: Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by WESTERN STATES SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION SHERIFF ADAM CHRISTIANSON; SHERIFF JON LOPEY; SHERIFF MARGARET MIMS; SHERIFF TOM BOSENKO; DAVID HENCRATT; SHERIFF STEVEN DURFOR; SHERIFF THOMAS ALLMAN; SHERIFF DAVID ROBINSON; SHERIFF SCOTT JONES; SHERIFF BRUCE HANEY. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521424] [10-56971, 11-16255] (JSG) [Entered: 04/30/2015 04:31 PM]
04/30/2015  255 
36 pg, 182.2 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, U.S. Justice Foundation, Lincoln Institute, Abraham Lincoln Foundation for Public Policy Research, Policy Analysis Center, Institute on the Constitution, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521521] [10-56971, 11-16255] (HWT) [Entered: 04/30/2015 05:11 PM]
04/30/2015  256 
37 pg, 82.14 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus Brief for review. Submitted by Amicus Curiae NRA in 10-56971, 11-16255. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521524] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CJC) [Entered: 04/30/2015 05:13 PM]
04/30/2015  257 
172 pg, 37.66 MB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Everytown for Gun Safety. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521526] [10-56971, 11-16255] (DG) [Entered: 04/30/2015 05:17 PM]
04/30/2015  258 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Deficiencies. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [260]. Original Text: Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE WESTERN STATES SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION; SHERIFF ADAM CHRISTIANSON; SHERIFF JON LOPEY; SHERIFF MARGARET MIMS; SHERIFF TOM BOSENKO; DAVID HENCRATT; SHERIFF STEVEN DURFOR; SHERIFF THOMAS ALLMAN; SHERIFF DAVID ROBINSON; SHERIFF SCOTT JONES. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521553] [10-56971, 11-16255] (JSG) [Entered: 04/30/2015 05:40 PM]
04/30/2015  259 
20 pg, 613.34 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review and filed Motion to become amicus curiae. Submitted by The Madison Society, Inc.. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521557] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief and motion. Spread to case 11-16255. 05/01/2015 by TL] (BMK) [Entered: 04/30/2015 05:53 PM]
04/30/2015  260 
22 pg, 98.64 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE WESTERN STATES SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION; SHERIFF ADAM CHRISTIANSON; SHERIFF JON LOPEY; SHERIFF MARGARET MIMS; SHERIFF TOM BOSENKO; DAVID HENCRATT; SHERIFF STEVEN DURFOR; SHERIFF THOMAS ALLMAN; SHERIFF DAVID ROBINSON; SHERIFF SCOTT JONES. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521560] [10-56971, 11-16255] (JSG) [Entered: 04/30/2015 06:03 PM]
04/30/2015  261 
38 pg, 178.46 KB
Submitted (ECF) Intervenor brief for review and filed Motion to file non-standard brief. Submitted by Intervenor – Pending State of California in 10-56971, Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521567] [10-56971, 11-16255] (GDB) [Entered: 04/30/2015 06:50 PM]
04/30/2015  262 
37 pg, 89.73 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association, Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, Law Enforcement Action Network, and Law Enforcement Alliance of America. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521588] [10-56971, 11-16255] (DMP) [Entered: 04/30/2015 11:33 PM]
04/30/2015  263 
3 pg, 77.29 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Dan M. Peterson for Amici Curiae ILEETA and LEAA in 10-56971. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521590] [10-56971, 11-16255] (DMP) [Entered: 04/30/2015 11:42 PM]
04/30/2015  264 
34 pg, 191.28 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC.; ASSOCIATION OF NEW JERSEY RIFLE & PISTOL CLUBS, INC.; COMMONWEALTH SECOND AMENDMENT, INC.; GUN OWNERS’ ACTION LEAGUE; MARYLAND STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC.. Date of service: 04/30/2015. [9521591] [10-56971, 11-16255] (DDJ) [Entered: 04/30/2015 11:49 PM]
05/01/2015  265 Added attorney Dan M. Peterson for ILEETA LEAA, in case 10-56971. [9521616] (CW) [Entered: 05/01/2015 07:24 AM]
05/01/2015  266 
2 pg, 46.32 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Oral argument in this en banc case will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 16, 2015, in Courtroom One of the James R. Browning Courthouse, located at 95 Seventh Street in San Francisco, California 94103. http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/information/locations.php [9522039] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 05/01/2015 10:23 AM]
05/01/2015  267 Added attorney Charles J. Cooper for NRA. [9522084] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 10:38 AM]
05/01/2015  268 Entered appearance of Amici Curiae (1) Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, U.S. Justice Foundation, Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, Abraham Lincoln Foundation for Public Policy Research, Inc., Policy Analysis Center, Institute on the Constitution, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund; (2) Everytown for Gun Safety; (3) Western States Sheriffs’ Association, Sheriff Adam Christianson, Sheriff Jon Lopey, Sheriff Margaret Mims, Sheriff Tom Bosenko, David Hencratt, Sheriff Steven Durfor, Sheriff Thomas Allman, Sheriff David Robinson, Sheriff Scott Jones, Sheriff Bruce Haney, Sheriff John D’Agostini, and Retired Sheriff Larry Jones; (4) Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund; (5) Law Enforcement Action Network; and (6) New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Commonwealth Second Amendment, Gun Owners’ Action League, and Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association; Amicus Curiae – Pending The Madison Society, Inc. [9522186] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 11:13 AM]
05/01/2015  269 
2 pg, 190.63 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [255] submitted by Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, U.S. Justice Foundation, Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, Abraham Lincoln Foundation for Public Policy Research, Inc., Policy Analysis Center, Institute on the Constitution, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9522236] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 11:27 AM]
05/01/2015  270 
2 pg, 190.32 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [256] submitted by NRA is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9522259] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 11:34 AM]
05/01/2015  271 
2 pg, 190.29 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [257] submitted by Everytown for Gun Safety is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9522276] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 11:41 AM]
05/01/2015  272 
2 pg, 190.65 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [260] submitted by Western States Sheriffs’ Association, Sheriff Adam Christianson, Sheriff Jon Lopey, Sheriff Margaret Mims, Sheriff Tom Bosenko, David Hencratt, Sheriff Steven Durfor, Sheriff Thomas Allman, Sheriff David Robinson, Sheriff Scott Jones, Sheriff Bruce Haney, Sheriff John D’Agostini, and Retired Sheriff Larry Jones is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9522302] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 11:52 AM]
05/01/2015  273 
2 pg, 190.47 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [262] submitted by ILEETA, Law Enforcement Action Network, LEAA and Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9522324] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 11:59 AM]
05/01/2015  274 
2 pg, 190.55 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [264] submitted by New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Commonwealth Second Amendment, Gun Owners’ Action League, and Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9522338] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 12:07 PM]
05/01/2015  275 Notice of (Consolidated) Oral Argument on Tuesday, June 16, 2015 – 3:30 P.M. – Courtroom 1 – James R Browning US Cthse, 95 7th Street, San Francisco CA.

View the Oral Argument Calendar for your case here.

When you have reviewed the calendar, download the ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HEARING NOTICE form, complete the form, and file it via Appellate ECF or return the completed form to: SAN FRANCISCO Office.
[9522507] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AW) [Entered: 05/01/2015 01:52 PM]

05/01/2015  276 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [243] filed by League of California Cities. (sent to en banc court) [9522526] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/01/2015 02:04 PM]
05/01/2015  277 
1 pg, 68.31 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney James Chapin, Esquire for Appellees County of San Diego and William D. Gore. [9522829] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 11-16255. 05/01/2015 by TL] (JC) [Entered: 05/01/2015 03:50 PM]
05/04/2015  278 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [251] filed by State of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. (sent to en banc court) [9524015] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/04/2015 01:38 PM]
05/04/2015  279 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [256] filed by NRA. (sent to en banc court) [9524106] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/04/2015 02:01 PM]
05/04/2015  280 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [240] filed by Pink Pistols, Second Amendment Sisters, and Women Against Gun Control, Inc. (sent to en banc court) [9524126] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/04/2015 02:08 PM]
05/04/2015  281 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [249] filed by Congress of Racial Equality, Inc. (sent to en banc court) [9524146] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/04/2015 02:14 PM]
05/05/2015  282 
2 pg, 44.9 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS): The Motion of Proposed Intervenor State of California for leave to file a brief on the merits is GRANTED. The Motion of the Madison Society, Inc., for leave to file an amicus curae brief is GRANTED. [9525000] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/05/2015 09:17 AM]
05/05/2015  283 
2 pg, 190.24 KB
Filed clerk order: The intervenor brief [261] submitted by State of California is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9525628] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/05/2015 01:23 PM]
05/05/2015  284 
2 pg, 190.26 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [259] submitted by The Madison Society, Inc. is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9525652] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/05/2015 01:29 PM]
05/05/2015  285 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [257] filed by Everytown for Gun Safety. (sent to en banc court) [9525708] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/05/2015 01:45 PM]
05/06/2015  286 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [260] filed by Western States Sheriffs’ Association, Sheriff Adam Christianson, Sheriff Jon Lopey, Sheriff Margaret Mims, Sheriff Tom Bosenko, David Hencratt, Sheriff Steven Durfor, Sheriff Thomas Allman, Sheriff David Robinson, Sheriff Scott Jones, Sheriff Bruce Haney, Sheriff John D’Agostini, and Retired Sheriff Larry Jones. (sent to en banc court) [9527543] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/06/2015 01:56 PM]
05/06/2015  287 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [246] filed by Governors, States of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. (sent to en banc court) [9527569] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/06/2015 02:04 PM]
05/06/2015  288 
1 pg, 65.77 KB
Filed Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney John A. Whitesides, Esquire for Amici Curiae County of Yolo and Edward G. Prieto in 10-56971; and for Appellees County of Yolo and Ed Prieto in 11-16255. [9528006] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/06/2015 04:19 PM]
05/06/2015  289 
1 pg, 66.45 KB
Filed Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Serena M. Warner, Esquire for Appellees County of Yolo and Ed Prieto. [9528012] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/06/2015 04:20 PM]
05/07/2015  290 
1 pg, 73.27 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Alan Gura for Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart in 11-16255. [9528175] [11-16255, 10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 05/07/2015 05:54 AM]
05/07/2015  291 
1 pg, 19.47 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Paul D. Clement for Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson, Edward Peruta and Amicus Curiae NRA. [9528620] [10-56971] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 11-16255. 05/07/2015 by TL] (PDC) [Entered: 05/07/2015 10:28 AM]
05/07/2015  292 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [262] filed by ILEETA, Law Enforcement Action Network, LEAA and Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund. (sent to en banc court) [9528836] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/07/2015 11:38 AM]
05/07/2015  293 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [264] filed by New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Commonwealth Second Amendment, Gun Owners’ Action League, and Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association. (sent to en banc court) [9528876] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/07/2015 11:50 AM]
05/08/2015  294 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [255] filed by Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, U.S. Justice Foundation, Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, Abraham Lincoln Foundation for Public Policy Research, Inc., Policy Analysis Center, Institute on the Constitution, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund. (sent to en banc court) [9530420] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/08/2015 11:00 AM]
05/11/2015  295 Received 25 paper copies of Intervenor brief [261] filed by State of California. (sent to en banc court) [9532423] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/11/2015 02:31 PM]
05/11/2015  296 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [259] filed by The Madison Society, Inc. (sent to en banc court) [9532458] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 05/11/2015 02:39 PM]
05/12/2015  297 
5 pg, 32.52 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor State of California in 10-56971, Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255 Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion for Leave to Participate in Oral Argument]. Date of service: 05/12/2015. [9534221] [10-56971, 11-16255] (GDB) [Entered: 05/12/2015 01:23 PM]
05/13/2015  298 
4 pg, 32.81 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in 10-56971, 11-16255 Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion for Clarification on Oral Argument]. Date of service: 05/13/2015. [9536722] [10-56971, 11-16255] (KLM) [Entered: 05/13/2015 04:01 PM]
05/14/2015  299 
2 pg, 45.81 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS): The motion of Proposed Intervenor State of California to participate in oral argument is GRANTED. The State of California shall share argument time with (1) the County of San Diego and Sheriff Gore and (2) the County of Yolo and Sheriff Prieto, in an amount to be determined by those parties. [9537256] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/14/2015 09:40 AM]
05/14/2015  300 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud. [9538116] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/14/2015 02:53 PM]
05/14/2015  301 
6 pg, 219.98 KB
Filed Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud motion to file criminally-proven amicus brief. Deficiencies: None. Served on 05/13/2015. [9538128] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/14/2015 02:56 PM]
05/19/2015  302 
2 pg, 35.97 KB
Filed (ECF) Intervenor State of California in 10-56971, Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255 Correspondence: Notice of departure of Ross C. Moody from the Department of Justice to assume a judgeship on the state superior court; request to remove Mr. Moody from the service lists in these consolidated appeals. Date of service: 05/19/2015 [9543333] [10-56971, 11-16255] (GDB) [Entered: 05/19/2015 04:47 PM]
05/19/2015  303 Terminated Ross Moody for State of California. [9543340] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/19/2015 04:50 PM]
05/20/2015  304 
26 pg, 284.96 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart in 11-16255 citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9543489] [11-16255, 10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 05/20/2015 07:04 AM]
05/20/2015  305 
2 pg, 78.61 KB
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Edward C. DuMont for Intervenor State of California in 10-56971, Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9544710] [10-56971, 11-16255] (ECD) [Entered: 05/20/2015 02:25 PM]
05/20/2015  306 Added attorney Edward C. DuMont for State of California. [9544735] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 05/20/2015 02:31 PM]
05/20/2015  307 
1 pg, 19.1 KB
Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: San Francisco. Filed by Attorney Mr. Edward C. DuMont for Intervenor State of California in 10-56971, Attorney Mr. Edward C. DuMont for Amicus Curiae State of California in 11-16255. [9544774] [10-56971, 11-16255] (ECD) [Entered: 05/20/2015 02:37 PM]
05/20/2015  308 
2 pg, 46.88 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AF): The motion of Patrick Missud for leave to file an amicus brief is DENIED. Pursuant to this Court’s prior order, any amicus brief must have been filed within 35 days of the entry of the order granting rehearing en banc. [9545182] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/20/2015 04:52 PM]
05/20/2015  309 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Incorrect ECF filing. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [310]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols in 10-56971, 11-16255 Correspondence: Motion of Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols for Leave to Participate in Oral Argument. Date of service: 05/20/2015 [9545249] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CN) [Entered: 05/20/2015 06:34 PM]
05/20/2015  310 
11 pg, 480.88 KB
Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae Charles Nichols in 10-56971, 11-16255 Motion for miscellaneous relief [Motion to participate in oral argument]. Date of service: 05/20/2015. [9545505] [10-56971, 11-16255] –[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [309] .] (TYL) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:20 AM]
05/21/2015  311 Terminated Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud in 10-56971 and Amicus Curiae – Pending Patrick Missud in 11-16255 [9545548] [10-56971, 11-16255] (AF) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:34 AM]
05/21/2015  312 
2 pg, 38.78 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Yolo and Ed Prieto citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/21/2015. [9545574] [11-16255] –[COURT UPDATE: Spread to case 10-56971. 05/21/2015 by TL] (JAW) [Entered: 05/21/2015 09:45 AM]
05/21/2015  313 
22 pg, 792.76 KB
Submitted (ECF) Intervenor brief for review and filed Motion to intervene. Submitted by Michael John Vogler. Date of service: 05/21/2015. [9545868] [10-56971, 11-16255] –[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief. 05/21/2015 by TL] (MJV) [Entered: 05/21/2015 11:30 AM]
05/27/2015  314 
2 pg, 34.21 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: PA):C-Span applied to video/audio record for later broadcast, the cases captioned above, scheduled to be heard at The James R. Browning, U.S. Courthouse in San Francisco, California, on Tuesday, June 16, 2015. C-Span’s request to video/audio record for later broadcast is GRANTED. C-Span will serve as the pool-feed for all media organizations that submit an application. [9551924] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA) [Entered: 05/27/2015 04:17 PM]
05/28/2015  315 
2 pg, 186.98 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [133] submitted by Legal Community Against Violence is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. 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. [9553559] (TH) [Entered: 05/28/2015 03:35 PM]
06/01/2015  316 
2 pg, 45.03 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Proposed Intervenor Michael Vogler’s motion for leave to intervene is DENIED. Because Mr. Vogler moved to intervene prior to the deadline for submitting amicus briefs, his motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED. [9557040] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 06/01/2015 02:36 PM]
06/01/2015  317 
2 pg, 44.09 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) The motion of amicus curiae Charles Nichols to participate in oral argument is DENIED. [9557087] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM) [Entered: 06/01/2015 02:44 PM]
06/02/2015  318 
2 pg, 190.23 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [313] submitted by Michael John Vogler is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 25 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: not applicable. 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. [9558366] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 06/02/2015 11:19 AM]
06/03/2015  319 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [133] filed by Legal Community Against Violence. (sent to en banc court) [9560563] (TH) [Entered: 06/03/2015 02:29 PM]
06/03/2015  320 
2 pg, 34.81 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: PA): Fox News applied to video/audio record for later broadcast, the cases captioned above, scheduled to be heard at The James R. Browning, U.S. Courthouse in San Francisco, California, on Tuesday, June 16, 2015. Fox News’ request to video/audio record for later broadcast is GRANTED. C-Span is designated to serve as the pool-feed for all media organizations that submit an application. [9560621] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA) [Entered: 06/03/2015 02:42 PM]
06/05/2015  321 Received 25 paper copies of Amicus brief [313] filed by Michael John Vogler. (sent to en banc court) [9563100] [10-56971, 11-16255] (TH) [Entered: 06/05/2015 11:00 AM]
06/12/2015  322 
2 pg, 33.89 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: PA):American News and Information Services Inc., applied to video/audio record for later broadcast, the cases captioned above, scheduled to be heard at The James R. Browning, U.S. Courthouse in San Francisco, California, on Tuesday, June 16, 2015. American News and Information Services Inc.’s request to video/audio record for later broadcast is DENIED. [9573310] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA) [Entered: 06/12/2015 04:21 PM]
06/12/2015  323 Filed Appellant Edward Peruta request for reconsideration of Court’s 6/12/2015 Order denying application to video/audio record for later broadcast and /or request for appeal . Deficiencies: None. Served on 06/12/2015 (request received via email). [9576206] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA) [Entered: 06/16/2015 12:12 PM]
06/16/2015  324 
1 pg, 32.41 KB
Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Edward Peruta and American News and Information Services, Inc.’s request for reconsideration and/or appeal of this Court’s June 12, 2015 order denying the application to video record for later broadcast the cases captioned above is DENIED. [9576216] [10-56971, 11-16255] (PA) [Entered: 06/16/2015 12:21 PM]
06/16/2015  325 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO SIDNEY R. THOMAS, HARRY PREGERSON, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, SUSAN P. GRABER, M. MARGARET MCKEOWN, WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, RICHARD A. PAEZ, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN, CARLOS T. BEA, N. RANDY SMITH and JOHN B. OWENS. [9577091] [10-56971, 11-16255] (JO) [Entered: 06/16/2015 05:47 PM]
06/19/2015  326 
3 pg, 118.06 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Second Amendment Foundation, Adam Richards and Brett Stewart in 11-16255 citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/19/2015. [9580449] [11-16255, 10-56971] (AG) [Entered: 06/19/2015 07:34 AM]
07/07/2015  327 
4 pg, 217.16 KB
Lodged non party Bill Stelter letter in support of concealed weapon permits. [9602520] [10-56971, 11-16255] (CW) [Entered: 07/08/2015 10:52 AM]
08/10/2015  328 
3 pg, 146.57 KB
Received non party letter regarding a private citizen’s view o the concealed carry license (CCL) issue and to support the Peruta position in this case. (FYI PANEL) [9641537] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 08/10/2015 04:48 PM]
08/21/2015  329 
1 pg, 26.16 KB
Received non party Jeffrey Massey letter regarding request to remove letter dated 08/04/2015 from docket. (FYI PANEL) [9656636] [10-56971, 11-16255] (RL) [Entered: 08/21/2015 03:25 PM]

 

Share