Siesta Village Mkt, et al v. Perry, et al



Download PDF
Siesta Village Mkt, et al v. Perry, et al Doc. 0 Att. 1 Case: 08-10146 Document: 00511183012 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/22/2010 United States Court of Appeals F IF T H C IR C U IT O F F I C E O F TH E C L E R K LYLE W . CAYCE CLERK T E L . 504-310-7700 6 0 0 S. M A E S T R I PLA C E N E W O R L E A N S , LA 70130 July 22, 2010 MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL OR PARTIES LISTED BELOW Regarding: Fifth Circuit Statement on Petitions for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc No. 08-10146, Siesta Village Mkt, et al v. Perry, et al USDC No. 4:06-CV-232 --------------------------------------------------Enclosed is a copy of the court's decision. The court has entered judgment under FED. R. APP. P. 36. (However, the opinion may yet contain typographical or printing errors which are subject to correction.) FED. R. APP. P. 39 through 41, and 5T H CIR. RULES 35, 39, and 41 govern costs, rehearings, and mandates. 5T H CIR. RULES 35 and 40 require you to attach to your petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc an unmarked copy of the court's opinion or order. Please read carefully the Internal Operating Procedures (IOP's) following FED. R. APP. P. 40 and 5T H CIR. R. 35 for a discussion of when a rehearing may be appropriate, the legal standards applied and sanctions which may be imposed if you make a nonmeritorious petition for rehearing en banc. Direct Criminal Appeals . 5T H CIR. R. 41 provides that a motion for a stay of mandate under FED. R. APP. P. 41 will not be granted simply upon request. The petition must set forth good cause for a stay or clearly demonstrate that a substantial question will be presented to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, this court may deny the motion and issue the mandate immediately. Pro Se Cases . If you were unsuccessful in the district court and/or on appeal, and are considering filing a petition for certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, you do not need to file a motion for stay of mandate under FED. R. APP. P. 41. The issuance of the mandate does not affect the time, or your right, to file with the Supreme Court. The judgment entered provides that each party bear its own costs on appeal. Sincerely, LYLE W. CAYCE, Clerk By:_________________________ Jamei R. Cheramie, Deputy Clerk Case: 08-10146 Document: 00511183012 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/22/2010 Enclosures Ms. Marianne Marsh Auld Mr. James F. Basile Mr. Charles Justin Cooper Ms. Susan Elisabeth Engel Ms. Tracy K Genesen Mr. Mark Charles Harwell Mr. James C. Ho Mr. Dee J. Kelly Sr. Mr. David E. Keltner Mr. Anthony Stanley Kogut Mr. Philip Andrew Lionberger Ms. Elizabeth Marie Locke Mr. Carter Glasgow Phillips Ms. Soraya Prince Freed Rudofsky Mr. Marshall M Searcy Jr. Mr. Derek L Shaffer Mr. Kent Martin Shimeall Mr. Henry W Simon Jr. Mr. Kenneth Winston Starr Mr. Sterling W Steves Mr. James Carlton Todd Mr. William Nolan Warren Mr. David Bruce Young

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?