For the latest updates on this case go to http://californiaopencarry.com/young-v-state-of-hawaii-appeal-12-17808-won-en-banc-petition-filed-on-9-14-2018/
Update by Charles Nichols – September 30, 2018 – There was an unopposed motion filed today which, if granted, would extend the due date for filing the response to the petition for rehearing en banc to November 8, 2018.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/30/2018 at 6:27:18 PM PDT and filed on 09/30/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. Unopposed Motion to extend time to file a response until 11/08/2018. Date of service: 09/30/2018. [11029683] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen)
The Response to the En Banc Petition is Due on October 9, 2018 –
Every question you might have regarding en banc procedures can be found at this link and at this link.
The short version is that we have no way of knowing when there will be a decision on the en banc petition.
87 days ago the decision in Young v. Hawaii was published which in turn made the decision binding on every Federal judge in the 9th circuit. The moment the decision was published at 10:00 AM on July 24, 2018, any competent lawyer could have obtained a TRO and a Preliminary injunction against California/Hawaii’s Open Carry bans!
If the Young v. Hawaii decision is reheard before an en banc panel then the three-judge panel decision will be vacated and the window for a TRO/Injunction will be closed.
We will then have to wait to see what the en banc panel decides.
None of the so-called gun-rights lawyers has, or will file motions for a TRO and preliminary injunction because the leadership of the gun-rights groups and the lawyers they hire all oppose Open Carry.
There are only two people on this planet who can’t file a motion for a TRO/Preliminary Injunction and those two people are Mr. Young, the sole plaintiff in Young v. Hawaii, and I (Charles Nichols) the sole plaintiff in Nichols v. Brown.
Remember that the next time a so-called gun-rights group asks you for money and shame on you if you give it to them.
It has been 87 days since the three-judge panel decision was published in this appeal!
WON!
Young v. Hawaii Decision 7-24-2018 – 12-17808
Now we wait and see what happens with an en banc petition.
On August 2, 2018, the court granted the unopposed motion for an extension of time to September 14, 2018, within which to file the en banc petition.
Unopposed Motion to Intervene – Young v. Hawaii – Filed on 8-16-2018
What kind of attorney doesn’t file an opposition to a motion to intervene?
The NRA attorneys in Peruta v. San Diego en banc and Mr. Young’s two attorneys! This is no doubt part of the CalGuns.nuts secret plan to win by losing!
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Neal Kumar Katyal for Appellee State of Hawaii. Date of service: 08/16/2018.
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Kaliko’onalani D. Fernandes for Appellee State of Hawaii. Date of service: 08/16/2018.
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Mitchell Pearsall Reich for Appellee State of Hawaii. Date of service: 08/16/2018
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Colleen E. Roh Sinzdak for Appellee State of Hawaii. Date of service: 08/16/2018.
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Clyde J. Wadsworth for Appellee State of Hawaii. Date of service: 08/16/2018.
Added attorneys Colleen Sinzdak, Mitchell Reich for State of Hawaii. 08/17/2018
Appellant’s Response to State of Hawaii’s Motion to Intervene – Filed on 8-17-2018
The Court entered an Order, sua sponte, on 8-29-2018, which extended the time for the State of Hawaii to file a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc until September 14, 2018 — a petition for rehearing en banc was filed on that day.
Young v. Hawaii – Petition for Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-14-2018 – 114 pages (download before viewing)
Memo to the B&S lawyers Beck and Stamboulieh – When the Court asks for your response, your response should be that you oppose the petition!
On September 18, 2018, the three-judge panel requested a response to the petition from Mr. Young’s attorneys. It is due within 21 days of the Order (October, 9, 11:59 PM).
157 – Amicus Brief – City and County of Honolulu – County of Kauai – County of Maui in Support of Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
160 – Amicus Brief – Everytown for Gun Safety in Support of Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
163 – Amicus Brief – Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Support of Hearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
166 – Amicus Brief – Eleven States and District of Columbia in Support of Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
It had been 162 days from oral argument to three-judge panel decision!
ORAL ARGUMENT TOOK PLACE ON 2-12-2018!
GOOD LUCK MR. YOUNG
(HE WON!)
2018-02-12 9:00 am Courtroom 250L, Honolulu Bankruptcy Courthouse Hawaii
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges
George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii – George Young appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action challenging under the Second Amendment provisions of Hawaii law pertaining to the issuance of permits to carry a concealed or unconcealed weapon. [1:12-cv-00336-HG-BMK]
The government’s attorney did not do well as you can see in this 10-minute long clip from the oral argment.
The three-judge panel in my California Open Carry appeal, Charles Nichols v. Edmund G. Brown Jr., et al, has decided to wait for the decision in Young v. Hawaii before entering its decision in my appeal. Why? Because the threshold Second Amendment question to be decided in Young v. Hawaii is the same Second Amendment threshold question to be decided in my appeal and because if the decision in Young is published, as opposed to being decided in an unpublished decision, the published decision in Young will be binding on the three-judge panel assigned to my appeal.
That threshold question is: “Is the Scope of the Second Amendment limited to the inside of our home?”
If the three-judge panel assigned to Mr. Young’s appeal rules in favor of Mr. Young then that panel is limited by the 9th circuit’s judge made rules to what Mr. Young asked for when he was in the district court. On appeal, Mr. Young was represented by an attorney who asked for a great deal more than Mr. Young sought in the district court and therefore Mr. Young won’t prevail on those points.
There is nothing in the Constitution or in the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure which prohibits the court of appeals from granting Mr. Young more than he asked for in the district court but appellate courts simply don’t do it.
Assuming that the three-judge panel assigned to Mr. Young’s appeal decides that the Second Amendment does indeed extend outside the door to his home, it will then turn to what he asked for from the district court judge.
Mr. Young asked for four things in the district court:
1) Permanent Injunction of H.R.S. 134.
H,R.S. (Hawaii Revised Statutes) 134 is the section of Hawaii law covering “FIREARMS, AMMUNITION AND DANGEROUS WEAPONS.” It is impossible to challenge an entire section of laws in a Federal court of law no matter who unconstitutional those laws may be. The reasons are many. Suffice it to say that Mr. Young will lose this one.
2) Immediate issuance of a concealed carry weapons permit or an unconcealed carry weapons permit for a period of not less than three years.*
*Mr. Young then adds that by “weapons” he means firearms and a variety of other weapons, specified and unspecified.
Mr. Young would most likely get a one year (not three year) license to openly carry a handgun. Courts don’t have the authority to rewrite laws. They can strike down laws either in part or in their entirety but they cannot write laws. Since the law provides only for the issuance of licenses to carry handguns, that is the only license the court can say he is entitled to get. Whether or not the court decides that “stun guns, tasers, mace spray, switch blades” are protected arms is anyone’s guess.
3) Punitive Damages to be not less than $1,000,000.
Nope. Sorry, not a snowball’s chance in Hell that Mr. Young will get the money.
4) All costs of court, reasonable attorney fees to be paid by Defendants.
As Mr. Young did not have an attorney in the district court (he represented himself) he is not entitled to attorney fees. If his case is remanded back to the district court for an award of costs then he will be able to recoup some, perhaps all, of his costs depending upon what costs he asks for and depending upon whether or not he meets the deadline and follows the other procedures to the letter.
Keep in mind that if the police chief gives Mr. Young a license to openly carry a handgun before the court of appeals issues its decision and if the defendants notify the court of appeals that Mr. Young now has his license then his appeal would, in all likelihood, be dismissed as moot.
With the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court, it has become that much more likely that SCOTUS will grant Second Amendment cert petitions, including Mr. Young’s should he lose his appeal. This is an incentive for the Hawaii defendant to give Mr. Young his license and moot his case but government is run by arrogant extremists who aren’t too bright. A bonus for Mr. Young, should he prevail.
There is also a possibility that the judges assigned to Mr. Young’s panel will simply remand his case back to the district court for a do-over. Given the procedural posture of his case in the district court when it was dismissed with prejudice by the district court judge, that would be the typical outcome but his case was dismissed way back in 2012. Where this to happen, his lawyer could (and should) file for a Writ of Mandamus which, if granted and issued, would have the same effect as Mr. Young winning his appeal.
Young v. State of Hawaii Appeal 12-17808
It has been 2320 days since this case was filed!
It has been 2125 days since the appeal was filed!
It has been 1974 days since the reply brief was filed!
It has been 822 days since the last brief was filed!
Note: During oral argument none of the judges, nor the government’s attorney, mentioned any of the procedural defects in the case and so I have deleted my list of them. It is pretty clear from the questioning during oral argument that the only thing the three-judge panel is going to consider is whether or not there is a right to a license to openly carry a handgun in public and, of course, the threshold question of whether or not the Second Amendment extends outside of the interior of our home.
Young v. Hawaii filed a Supplemental Brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on April 10, 2013. Click here to read. The Opening brief was filed in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on December 24, 2012 – George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al No. 12-17808. Here is an errata to the Opening Brief. Here is the Answering Brief and here is Young’s Reply Brief. Here is a link to the district court case for those with PACER access and here is a link for those without which includes many of the filings on appeal (EDIT: No longer updated). Here is Young’s pro se Complaint. Everything in the Complaint and argued in the district court which was not raised again in his Opening Brief is forfeited on appeal. The “Conclusion” section of his opening brief is the section of the brief which asks the court of appeals what relief to grant.
“Mr. Young respectfully requests this Court issue a directed judgment to the lower Court requiring it to issue a judgment requiring the following: Chapter 134 of Hawaii Revised Statutes be revised to allow for a means to carry a rifle outside the home for self-defense; a shotgun outside the home for self-defense; and an injunction on the laws prohibiting the in the home prohibitions of electric guns, switchblades, and butterfly knives. Finally an order either enjoining HRS 134-9 or compelling City Defendants to adopt policies to allow it to survive constitutional muster.”
Attorney Beck filed this Errata to the Opening Brief.
Attorney Beck asks the court of appeals to direct the lower court “to issue a judgment requiring the following: Chapter 134 of Hawaii Revised Statutes be revised to allow for a means to carry a rifle outside the home for self-defense; a shotgun outside the home for self-defense; and an injunction on the laws prohibiting the in the home prohibitions of electric guns, switchblades, and butterfly knives. Finally, an order either enjoining HRS 134-9 or compelling City Defendants to adopt policies to allow it to survive constitutional muster.
I hope Mr. Young wins and gets his license to openly carry a handgun. I hope his win does not result in the 9th circuit court of appeals publishing an opinion which holds that the Second Amendment right can be conditioned upon having a government issued permission slip.
From the motion to file a supplemental Amicus brief by the state of Hawaii (Dkt #91 [fn 2]):
” Plaintiff’s attack on Hawai‘i’s restrictions on long guns should be disregarded
because he never mentioned, much less challenged, those statutory restrictions in
his pleadings below, and no factual record underpins such claims. Bolder v. C.I.R.,
760 F.2d 1039, 1042 (9th Cir. 1985) (disregarding issues raised for the first time on
appeal). Furthermore, plaintiff has no standing to challenge such restrictions as he
never alleged an imminent desire to carry a long gun in public.”
103 – Order lifting stay of appeal – Young v Hawaii – Filed June 27, 2017
In order to access the individual filings from the Federal Docket links below, you will need a Federal PACER account.
Update by Charles Nichols – September 30, 2018 – There was an unopposed motion filed today which, if granted, would extend the due date for filing the response to the petition for rehearing en banc to November 8, 2018.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/30/2018 at 6:27:18 PM PDT and filed on 09/30/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. Unopposed Motion to extend time to file a response until 11/08/2018. Date of service: 09/30/2018. [11029683] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen)
Update by Charles Nichols – September 24, 2018 – There were four Amicus briefs filed in support of rehearing en banc today.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/24/2018 at 4:01:57 PM PDT and filed on 09/24/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, COUNTY OF KAUAI, AND COUNTY OF MAUI IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC. Date of service: 09/24/2018. [11023362] [12-17808] (Jackson, Daniel)
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/24/2018 at 4:16:17 PM PDT and filed on 09/24/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. Date of service: 09/24/2018. [11023414] [12-17808] (Gupta, Deepak)
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/24/2018 at 4:44:00 PM PDT and filed on 09/24/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Date of service: 09/24/2018. [11023513] [12-17808] (Frankel, Simon)
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/24/2018 at 5:11:11 PM PDT and filed on 09/24/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by New Jersey, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.. Date of service: 09/24/2018. [11023582] [12-17808] (Feigenbaum, Jeremy)
157 – Amicus Brief – City and County of Honolulu – County of Kauai – County of Maui in Support of Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
160 – Amicus Brief – Everytown for Gun Safety in Support of Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
163 – Amicus Brief – Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Support of Hearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
166 – Amicus Brief – Eleven States and District of Columbia in Support of Rehearing En Banc – Filed 9-24-2018
Update by Charles Nichols – September 20, 2018 – The full docket reports for the court of appeals and the district court can be found at the bottom of this page.
Update by Charles Nichols – September 18, 2018 – The three-judge panel requested a response from Mr. Young’s attorneys to the Petition for Rehearing En Banc. This was not unexpected as the three-judge panel in Peruta v. San Diego likewise requested a response within a few days from the petition being filed. Once the response is filed, the three-judge panel will then decide whether nor not to grant the petition. In the Peruta v. San Diego appeal, in which Judge O’Scannlain presided, the three-judge panel denied the petitions 8 months and 7 days (252 days) after the response was filed.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/18/2018 at 9:14:56 AM PDT and filed on 09/18/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and SANDRA S. IKUTA): Appellant is directed to file a response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed with this Court on September 14, 2018. The response shall not exceed 15 pages or 4,200 words and shall be filed within 21 days of the date of this order. [11014991] (AF)
Update by Charles Nichols – September 14, 2018 – The Petition for Rehearing En Banc was filed. It is 114 pages long. You should download it before trying to view.
Young v. Hawaii – Petition for Rehearing En Banc
The following transaction was entered on 09/14/2018 at 2:54:47 PM PDT and filed on 09/14/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Appellees Neil Abercrombie, County of Hawaii, Hilo County Police Department, William P. Kenoi, Harry S. Kubojiri, Mr. David Mark Louie, I, Esquire and State of Hawaii petition for rehearing en banc (from 07/24/2018 opinion). Date of service: 09/14/2018. [11012483] [12-17808] (Katyal, Neal)
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/14/2018 at 2:48:31 PM PDT and filed on 09/14/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
Docket Text:
Added attorney Neal Kumar Katyal for William P. Kenoi County of Hawaii Harry S. Kubojiri Neil Abercrombie Hilo County Police Department David Mark Louie I State of Hawaii, in case 12-17808. [11012461] (CW)
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 09/14/2018 at 2:27:21 PM PDT and filed on 09/14/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Neal Kumar Katyal for Appellees Neil Abercrombie, County of Hawaii, Hilo County Police Department, William P. Kenoi, Harry S. Kubojiri, Mr. David Mark Louie, I, Esquire and State of Hawaii. Date of service: 09/14/2018. [11012403] [12-17808] (Katyal, Neal)
Update by Charles Nichols – August 29, 2018 – The Court filed the following Order:
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 08/29/2018 at 8:51:30 AM PDT and filed on 08/29/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and SANDRA S. IKUTA): The State of Hawaii’s motion to intervene pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2403(b), filed on August 16, 2018, is DENIED as unnecessary. The State of Hawaii is, and remains, a party to this appeal during the pendency of any en banc proceedings, since Young filed a notice of appeal with respect to the district court’s dismissal of his claims against both the State and the County. While we dismissed the appeal against the State, such dismissal is not effective until the mandate issues in this case. See Fed. R. App. P. 41. We sua sponte extend the time for the State of Hawaii to file a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc until September 14, 2018—the current deadline for the County of Hawaii to file any such petition. Judge Clifton dissents from the denial of the unopposed motion to intervene. He would grant it. [10993822] (AF)
Update by Charles Nichols – August 23, 2018 – The application for an exemption to Ninth Circuit Rule 46-5 was granted.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 08/23/2018 at 3:11:40 PM PDT and filed on 08/23/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and SANDRA S. IKUTA): The Application for an exemption to Ninth Circuit Rule 46-5 for Attorney Kaliko‘onalani D. Fernandes, filed on August 21, 2018, is GRANTED. [10987762] (AF)
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 21, 2018, – An application for an exemption to Ninth Circuit Rule 46-5 was filed.
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION TO CIRCUIT RULE 46-5
Kalikoʻonalani D. Fernandes is a former Ninth Circuit law clerk to 9th circuit court of appeals judge Clifton who is now seeking an exemption to Ninth Circuit Rule 46-5 in order to represent the State of Hawaii in defense of its Handgun Open Carry ban.
Judge Clifton is the dissenting Judge in Young v. Hawaii who would have upheld the handgun Open Carry ban.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 08/21/2018 at 4:26:21 PM PDT and filed on 08/21/2018
Case Name: George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al
Case Number: 12-17808
Document(s): Document(s)
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Intervenor – Pending State of Hawaii Motion for 46-5 exemption. Date of service: 08/21/2018. [10984716] [12-17808] (Fernandes, Kaliko’Onalani)
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 6, 2018, – Amicus brief by State of Hawaii filed.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 08/06/2018 at 2:09:01 PM PDT and filed on 08/06/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [35] submitted by State of Hawaii is filed. No paper copies are required at this time. [10967505] (KWG)
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 2, 2018, – Unopposed motion to grant the extension of time to file the en banc petition is granted.
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 08/02/2018 at 12:03:31 PM PDT and filed on 08/02/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and SANDRA S. IKUTA) Appellees’ motion for a 45-day extension of time to file a petition for rehearing and a petition for rehearing en banc, filed with this court on July 31, 2018, is GRANTED. Appellees’ petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc will now be due on September 14, 2018. [10963920] (WL)
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 1, 2018, – Young withdraws opposition to the motion to extend the deadline for file an en banc petition to 45 days. Initially, Young had opposed an extension greater than 14 days.
133 – Young Withdraws his Opposition to en banc Petition Extension of Time
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 08/01/2018 at 2:22:34 PM PDT and filed on 08/01/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. response non-opposing motion ([132] Motion (ECF Filing), [132] Motion (ECF Filing)). Date of service: 08/01/2018. [10962827] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen)
Notice will be electronically mailed to:
Ms. Laureen L. Martin, Assistant Corporation Counsel
Mr. John M. Cregor, Jr., Deputy Attorney General
Mrs. Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry
Mr. Alan Alexander Beck, Attorney
Mr. Robert Tadao Nakatsuji
Melody A. Parker, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Stephen D. Stamboulieh
D. Kaena Horowitz, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 31, 2018 – Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing until 09/14/2018.
Young v. Hawaii Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing
The following transaction was entered on 07/31/2018 at 6:44:58 PM PDT and filed on 07/31/2018
| Case Name: | George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al | |
| Case Number: | 12-17808 | |
| Document(s): | Document(s) | |
Docket Text:
Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi and Harry S. Kubojiri Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing until 09/14/2018. Date of service: 07/31/2018. [10961892] [12-17808] (Horowitz, D. Kaena)
Notice will be electronically mailed to:
Ms. Laureen L. Martin, Assistant Corporation Counsel
Mr. John M. Cregor, Jr., Deputy Attorney General
Mrs. Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry
Mr. Alan Alexander Beck, Attorney
Mr. Robert Tadao Nakatsuji
Melody A. Parker, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Stephen D. Stamboulieh
D. Kaena Horowitz, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 24, 2018 – WON!
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 12, 2018 – Argued and submitted for a decision.
| 02/12/2018 | 125 | ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and SANDRA S. IKUTA. [10760164] (TG) [Entered: 02/12/2018 12:54 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 2, 2018 – Attorney Alan Beck will be arguing for the plaintiff.
| 01/02/2018 | 122 | Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: Other (Honolulu, Hawaii). Filed by Attorney Mr. Alan Alexander Beck, Esquire for Appellant George K. Young, Jr.. [10709349] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 01/02/2018 12:28 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 29, 2017 – Nothing significant.
| 12/15/2017 | 118 | Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii Correspondence: Notice of Non-Participation in Oral Argument. Date of service: 12/15/2017 [10692353] [12-17808] (Nakatsuji, Robert) [Entered: 12/15/2017 12:10 PM] |
| 12/21/2017 | 119 | Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of D. Kaena Horowitz for Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi and Harry S. Kubojiri. Date of service: 12/21/2017. [10699949] [12-17808] (Horowitz, D. Kaena) [Entered: 12/21/2017 03:16 PM] |
| 12/21/2017 | 120 | Attorney Michael S. Kagami substituted by Attorney D. Kaena Horowitz, in 12-17808. [10700011] (HH) [Entered: 12/21/2017 03:32 PM] |
| 12/21/2017 | 121 | Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: Other (Honolulu, Hawaii). Filed by Attorney D. Kaena Horowitz for Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi and Harry S. Kubojiri. [10700044] [12-17808] (Horowitz, D. Kaena) [Entered: 12/21/2017 03:40 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 8, 2017 – Another 28(j) by Young.
| 12/08/2017 | 117 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/08/2017. [10683436] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 12/08/2017 07:42 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 6, 2017 – Acknowledgment of hearing notice filed by Appellant’s attorney.
| 12/05/2017 | 116 | Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice. Location: Other (Honolulu, HI). Filed by Attorney Stephen D. Stamboulieh for Appellant George K. Young, Jr.. [10679686] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 12/05/2017 05:27 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 4, 2017 – Oral Argument entered onto the docket.
| 12/04/2017 | 115 | Notice of Oral Argument on Monday, February 12, 2018 – 09:00 A.M. – Hawaii Bkcy Courtroom 250L – Honolulu HI.
View the Oral Argument Calendar for your case here. Be sure to review the GUIDELINES for important information about your hearing, including when to arrive (30 minutes before the hearing time) and when and how to submit additional citations (filing electronically as far in advance of the hearing as possible). 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. |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 3, 2017 – Oral Argument Calendared!
2018-02-12 9:00 am Courtroom 250L, Honolulu Bankruptcy Courthouse Hawaii
George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii – George Young appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action challenging under the Second Amendment provisions of Hawaii law pertaining to the issuance of permits to carry a concealed or unconcealed weapon. [1:12-cv-00336-HG-BMK]
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 1, 2017 – Nothing new, but the oral argument date is expected to appear on the court calendar this Sunday or Monday.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 28, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 31, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 24, 2017 – Notice of Supplemental Authority filed on October 20th.
114 Notice of Supplemental Authority
| 10/20/2017 | 114 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/20/2017. [10625658] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 10/20/2017 12:05 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 10, 2017 – Something new.
| 10/10/2017 | 113 | This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in Honolulu
Please review the Honolulu sitting dates for February 2018 and the two subsequent sitting months in that location at http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/court_sessions. If you have an unavoidable conflict on any of the dates, please inform the court within 3 days of this notice, using CM/ECF (Type of Document: File Correspondence to Court; Subject: regarding availability for oral argument). When setting your argument date, the court will try to work around unavoidable conflicts; the court is not able to accommodate mere scheduling preferences. You will receive notice that your case has been assigned to a calendar approximately 10 weeks before the scheduled oral argument date. If the parties wish to discuss settlement before an argument date is set, they should jointly request referral to the mediation unit by filing a letter within 3 days of this notice, using CM/ECF (Type of Document: File Correspondence to Court; Subject: request for mediation).[10610778] (AW) [Entered: 10/10/2017 11:01 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 9, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 29, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 14, 2017 – Notice of supplemental authority.
| 09/12/2017 | 112 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 09/12/2017. [10577538] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 09/12/2017 10:54 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 8, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 31, 2017 – Nothing new. Oral argument tentatively scheduled for the week of February 12, 2018, in Hawaii.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 14, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 4, 2017 – We are now ten weeks out from the last oral argument day for Hawaii this year and this case does not appear on the calendar. The next earliest date for oral argument to take place in this appeal is in February of 2018.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 31, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 25, 2017 – New activity. Not surprisingly, Young’s attorneys filed a poorly argued FRAP 28(j) letter regarding the Wrenn v. DC decision. 111 – Young v Hawaii – Notice of Supplemental Authority to Wrenn v DC
07/25/2017 111 Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 07/25/2017. [10520974] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 07/25/2017 02:39 PM]
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 24, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 3, 2017 – New activity:
| 07/03/2017 | 110 | Attorneys Melody A. Parker, Melody A. Parker and Melody A. Parker in 12-17808 substituted by Attorneys Michael S. Kagami, Michael S. Kagami and Michael S. Kagami in 12-17808 [10495203] (CW) [Entered: 07/03/2017 07:17 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 30, 2017 – New activity:
The FRAP 28(j) filed by Young is in regards to Duncan v. Becerra.
06/30/2017 108 Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/30/2017. [10495059] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 06/30/2017 05:20 PM]06/30/2017 109 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Michael S. Kagami for Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi and Harry S. Kubojiri. Date of service: 06/30/2017. [10495112] [12-17808] (Kagami, Michael) [Entered: 06/30/2017 06:27 PM]
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 29, 2017 – Nothing new. On June 27th, the Clerk, on behalf of the Court, said that it would place this appeal on the next available calendar. That would be in September. Typically, the Clerk will inform the parties in an appeal that there case is being considered for oral arguments a month or two in advance and when the date is set, the lawyers who will be arguing the case before the panel of judges must file an acknowledgment of hearing notice. I will check the docket on this case every weekday and update the status.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 28, 2017 – Today I noticed that my docket still does not reflect Young v. Hawaii as a related case and so I filed this letter of Correspondence to the Court.
77 – Notice of Related Case – George Young Jr v State of Hawaii et al No 12-17808
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 27, 2017 – This appeal was stayed pending the disposition of Baker v. Kealoha. Baker v. Kealoha was remanded back to the district court thereby terminating the stay. Nevertheless, the plaintiff’s attorney filed a motion to lift the stay (which was no longer in effect). Today, the Clerk of the Court entered an Order (on behalf of the Court) lifting the stay. The Clerk also said that ” This appeal shall be placed on the next available calendar.”
If this appeal is scheduled for oral arguments then you should not be surprised to see a motion from me asking for my appeal to be heard at the same time, before the same panel.
103 – Order lifting stay of appeal – Young v Hawaii
| 06/27/2017 | 107 | Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): Appellant’s motion to lift the stay entered in this appeal (Docket Entry No. [103]) is granted. This appeal shall be placed on the next available calendar. [10489137] (AF) [Entered: 06/27/2017 10:23 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 26, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 15, 2017 – Notice of supplemental authority filed yesterday. Unsurprisingly, the case cited is irrelevant to this case.
106 – Young v. Hawaii Notice of Supplemental Authority
| 06/14/2017 | 106 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/14/2017. [10473890] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 06/14/2017 03:27 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 8, 2017 – Nothing new. The stay expired 90 days ago. One would think there would have been some movement in this appeal by now.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 31, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 8, 2017 – Supplemental authority regarding Fisher v. Kealoha filed by Young’s attorney.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 5, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 28, 2017 – Supplemental authority filed by Young. Note that the lawyers still have not learned how to write a proper FRAP Rule 28(j) letter.
Supplemental Authority in Young v. Hawaii Filed on April 25-2017
| 04/25/2017 | 104 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 04/25/2017. [10410598] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 04/25/2017 02:43 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 24, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 5, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 3, 2017 – This appeal was stayed pending the mandate in Baker v. Kealoha. This morning the Mandate was issued in Baker.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 31, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 27, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 10, 2017 – Now that Baker v. Kealoha has been remanded back to the district court for a do-over, a motion was filed today to lift the stay in this case. A motion must state whether or not it is opposed or unopposed. Unsurprisingly, attorney Alan Beck did not indicate in his motion whether or not his motion is opposed or unopposed. 103 – Young Motion to Lift Stay
| 03/10/2017 | 103 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 03/10/2017. [10352166] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 03/10/2017 01:40 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 6, 2017 – Typical of the 9th Circus Court of Appeals, this case was stayed 1,505 days after the appeal was filed in favor of an even weaker case, the preliminary injunction appeal in Baker v. Kealoha.
101 – Young v. Hawaii – Order of the Court staying appeal
| 02/06/2017 | 101 | Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): The court stays proceedings in this appeal pending this court’s, mandate in Baker v. Kealoha , 12-16258, or further order of the court. [10303840] (AF) [Entered: 02/06/2017 01:33 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 1, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 18, 2017 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 30, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 22, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 30, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 31, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 5, 2016 – Young’s attorney, Alan Beck, finally got around to informing the court about the Murphy v. CNMI Government decision. His notice was technically deficient which seems to be typical of the so called gun-rights attorneys.
| 10/05/2016 | 99 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 10/05/2016. [10149913] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 10/05/2016 01:07 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 4, 2016 – Still no 28(j) letter from Baker’s attorneys regarding Murphy v. CNMI Government. The Murphy decision was published on September 28, 2016. How hard can it be to write a letter which is limited to 350 words?
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 30, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 31, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 5, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 20, 2016 – A new filing.
98 – Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii reply to response to motion to file supplemental brief
|
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 18, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 15, 2016 – It should come as no surprise that the bickering has been referred to the panel of judges (not yet picked) which will ultimately decide this case.
| 07/12/2016 | 92 | Filed (ECF) Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii Motion to file supplemental brief. Date of service: 07/12/2016. [10050198]–[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [91].] (LA) [Entered: 07/14/2016 11:44 AM] |
| 07/12/2016 | 93 | Submitted (ECF) Supplemental Brief for review. Submitted by Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi, Hilo County Police Department and Harry S. Kubojiri. Date of service: 07/14/2016. [10050473] [12-17808]–[COURT UPDATE: Backdated entry to reflect original submission date, attached consolidated PDF of brief. 07/14/2016 by LA] (Parker, Melody) [Entered: 07/14/2016 02:00 PM] |
| 07/14/2016 | 94 | Filed clerk order: The supplemental brief [93] submitted by County of Hawaii, et al. is lodged. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, appellees are ordered to file 7 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: tan. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10050714] (LA) [Entered: 07/14/2016 03:36 PM] |
| 07/14/2016 | 95 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. response opposing motion ([92] Motion (ECF Filing), [92] Motion (ECF Filing) motion to file supplemental brief, [91] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing)). Date of service: 07/14/2016. [10051016] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 07/14/2016 08:22 PM] |
| 07/15/2016 | 96 | Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): The motion of Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii to file an oversized supplemental brief (Docket No. [92]) is referred to the panel that considers the merits of the appeal. [10051221] (AF) [Entered: 07/15/2016 09:46 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 12, 2016 – The Appellees filed a response opposing the motion of Young to file a supplemental brief. The State of Hawaii filed a motion for leave to file a supplemental Amicus brief.
90 – Response Opposing Young’s Motion
91 – Supplemental Amicus Brief by Hawaii
| 07/12/2016 | 90 | Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi, Harry S. Kubojiri and Hilo County Police Department response opposing motion ([87] Brief Submitted for Review (ECF Filing)). Date of service: 07/12/2016. [10047277] [12-17808] (Parker, Melody) [Entered: 07/12/2016 11:54 AM] |
| 07/12/2016 | 91 | Submitted (ECF) Amicus Brief for review. Submitted by Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii. Date of service: 07/12/2016. [10048162] [12-17808] (Lau, Girard) [Entered: 07/12/2016 06:35 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 6, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 1, 2016 – Nothing new.
| 07/01/2016 | 89 | Received 7 paper copies of Supplemental Brief [87] lodged by George K. Young, Jr.. [10036997] (SD) [Entered: 07/01/2016 02:33 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 27, 2016 – Nothing new.
| 06/23/2016 | 87 | Submitted (ECF) Supplemental Brief for review. Submitted by Appellant George K. Young, Jr.. Date of service: 06/23/2016. [10027376] [12-17808] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 06/23/2016 02:56 PM] |
| 06/23/2016 | 88 | Filed clerk order: The supplemental brief [87] submitted by George K. Young, Jr. is lodged. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, appellant is ordered to submit 7 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: tan. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10027684] (LA) [Entered: 06/23/2016 04:21 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 18, 2016 – Young’s motion for leave to file a supplemental brief has been referred to the merits panel. The state filed an opposition which will also be referred to the merits panel (the panel which will be assigned to hear the case). 84 – Appellant George K. Young, Jr. Motion to file supplemental brief. 86 – Appellee’s response opposing motion to supplement brief.
| 06/15/2016 | 85 | Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): Appellant’s motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (Docket No. [84]) is referred to the merits panel. Within 14 days after the date of this order, the appellant may submit a supplemental brief not to exceed 2,400 words. Within 28 days after the date of this order, the appellees may file a supplemental response brief not to exceed 2,400 words. The proposed briefs shall be lodged pending the Courts’s resolution of appellant’s motion. [10016724] (AF) [Entered: 06/15/2016 05:17 PM] |
| 06/16/2016 | 86 | Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi, Hilo County Police Department and Harry S. Kubojiri response opposing motion ([84] Motion (ECF Filing), [84] Motion (ECF Filing) motion to file supplemental brief). Date of service: 06/16/2016. [10018254] [12-17808] (Parker, Melody) [Entered: 06/16/2016 03:57 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 10, 2016 – Young’s attorney filed a motion to file a supplemental brief yesterday.
| 06/09/2016 | 84 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. Motion to file supplemental brief. Date of service: 06/09/2016. [10009328] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 06/09/2016 05:17 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 3, 2016 – Young’s attorney, Alan Beck, filed a notice of supplemental authority to the recent 9th Circuit decision Teixeria v. Alameda County.
| 05/22/2016 | 83 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/22/2016. [9986101] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 05/22/2016 03:21 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 11, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 29, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 24, 2016 – There has been some new activity since my last update. Young’s attorneys filed a request for judicial notice (Dkt #80) to which the Appellees filed an objection (Dkt # 81). Long before I filed my California Open Carry lawsuit I was corresponding with an Appellate attorney on the East Coast who suggested several books for me to study. One of those books he strongly emphasized that I learn was on the Federal Rules of Evidence. Fortunately, my case did not go to trial as none of my evidence or facts was disputed. Perhaps Young’s attorneys should have studied the Federal Rules of Evidence, not to mention the Federal Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedures. I suspect that the objection will be sustained. A court of appeals is not a trial court. One would think this is something they should have learned in law school.
| 03/30/2016 | 80 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. Motion to take judicial notice of County of Hawaii concedes the fact contained in the Hawaii Attorney General most recent firearms study which indicates there are no permits is accurate and to its knowledge the County of Hawaii has never issued a carry permit to private citizen. Date of service: 03/30/2016. [9922160] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 03/30/2016 06:21 PM] |
| 04/08/2016 | 81 | Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Hawaii, Hilo County Police Department, William P. Kenoi and Harry S. Kubojiri response opposing motion ([80] Motion (ECF Filing), [80] Motion (ECF Filing) motion to take judicial notice). Date of service: 04/08/2016. [9933029] [12-17808] (Parker, Melody) [Entered: 04/08/2016 12:08 PM] |
| 04/10/2016 | 82 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. reply to response (motion to take judicial notice, ). Date of service: 04/10/2016. [9933890] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 04/10/2016 05:31 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 22, 2016 – A Notice of Supplemental Authority to the SCOTUS Caetano decision was filed which is fine and good for a Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(j) letter but the notice also asks for an immediate injunction which is not allowed in a 28(j) letter. A competent attorney would know that an injunction is sought typically through a motion and sometimes through a writ.
| 03/22/2016 | 79 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/22/2016. [9909887] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 03/22/2016 07:10 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 11, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 4, 2016 – The Plaintiff’s attorney filed a citation of supplemental authority to Kolbe v Hogan is now worthless given that the 4th Circuit granted the en banc petition.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 29, 2016 – The Plaintiff’s attorney filed a citation of supplemental authority to Kolbe v Hogan which wasn’t a decision on the merits but a remand back to the district court for further proceedings so it really doesn’t help him much.
| 02/06/2016 | 78 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 02/06/2016. [9857278] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 02/06/2016 05:33 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 5, 2016 – Nothing new to speak of other than the Plaintiff’s attorney filed yet another notice of supplemental authority which hurts his case.
| 01/15/2016 | 77 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 01/15/2016. [9829918] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 01/15/2016 06:03 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 4, 2016 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 18, 2015 – Young filed a notice of supplemental authority which is about as far removed from being relevant to this case as is the moon.
| 12/06/2015 | 76 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 12/06/2015. [9781167] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 12/06/2015 04:48 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 4, 2015 – Nothing new.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 30, 2015 – Young filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority to State v. Herrmann a decision from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals which held that switch blades are protected arms under the Second Amendment. His notice forgot to include the word count limitation statement.
| 11/27/2015 | 75 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 11/27/2015. [9772164] [12-17808] (Stamboulieh, Stephen) [Entered: 11/27/2015 01:41 PM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 29, 2015 – Young added a second attorney.
| 10/16/2015 | 73 | Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Stephen Dean Stamboulieh for Appellant George K. Young, Jr.. Date of service: 10/16/2015. [9722114] [12-17808] (SDS) [Entered: 10/16/2015 05:24 PM] |
| 10/19/2015 | 74 | Added attorney Stephen D. Stamboulieh for George K. Young Jr., in case 12-17808. [9722378] (KB) [Entered: 10/19/2015 09:11 AM] |
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 8, 2015 – Just for laughs I checked the docket and to nobody’s surprise the appeal has not moved an inch.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 1, 2015 – This case will likely remain in limbo until Peruta is decided therefore this is my last update in this case until there is movement in the appeal.
Update May 7, 2015 – The appeal is still in limbo.
Update April 18, 2015 – The appeal is still in limbo.
Update March 17, 2015 – The appeal is still in limbo.
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 which was published in June of 2008 which is still languishing on appeal.
|
||||||||||
|
No Significant Update January 20, 2015.
Update September 22, 2014 – Nothing new. I don’t expect any significant movement until Peruta v. San Diego is resolved.
|
Update September 2, 2014 – Notice of Supplemental Authority to Taylor v. City of Baton Rouge (M.D. La. Aug. 25, 2014) was filed on 8/27/2014.
| 08/07/2014 | 67 | Terminated Michael Joseph Udovic for Harry S. Kubojiri and William P. Kenoi in 12-17808 – RETIRED [9197262] (RY) |
| 08/27/2014 | 68 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 08/25/2014. [9221520] (AAB) |
Update July 22, 2014 – Not much new since the last update.
07/02/2014 65 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Joseph Kalani Kamelamela for Appellees County of Hawaii, William P. Kenoi and Harry S. Kubojiri. Date of service: 07/02/2014. [9154890] (JK)
07/03/2014 66 Attorney Michael Joseph Udovic in 12-17808 substituted by Attorney Joseph Kamelamela in 12-17808 [9155058] (CW)
Update April 29, 2014 – The State of Hawaii adds a couple of lawyers.
| 04/29/2014 | 61 | Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry for Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii. Date of service: 04/29/2014. [9076763] (KTG) |
| 04/29/2014 | 62 | Added attorney Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry for State of Hawaii, in case 12-17808. [9076781] (EL) |
| 04/29/2014 | 63 | Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Robert Tadao Nakatsuji for Amicus Curiae State of Hawaii. Date of service: 04/29/2014. [9076863] (RTN) |
| 04/29/2014 | 64 | Added attorney Robert Tadao Nakatsuji for State of Hawaii, in case 12-17808. [9077179] (EL) |
Update March 29, 2014 – Notice of supplemental authorities filed regarding Baker v. Kealoha. Curiously, the cover letter states that this appeal (Young) is unopposed.
| 03/29/2014 | 60 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/29/2014. [9036661] (AAB) |
Update March 28, 2014 – Notice of supplemental authorities filed regarding Jackson v. San Francisco.
| 03/27/2014 | 59 | Filed (ECF) Appellant George K. Young, Jr. citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 03/27/2014. [9033140] (AAB) |
Update March 16, 2014 – Still very little activity in this case. I’ve posted an update to the court docket below.
Update May 24, 2013 – Reply Brief was filed.
Update May 12, 2013 – Young v. Hawaii filed a Supplemental Brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on April 10, 2013. Click here to read. The Opening brief was filed in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on December 24, 2012 – George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii, et al No. 12-17808. This is an Open Carry case, of sorts, Young seeks to carry openly and concealed. Here is a link to the district court case. I wish him luck.
In order to access the individual court filings below you will need a Federal PACER account.