Elizabeth Hassinger, et al v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Filing

Elizabeth Hassinger, et al v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Doc. 0 Att. 2

Case: 09-30708

Document: 00511219496

Page: 1

Date Filed: 08/30/2010

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

August 30, 2010 MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL OR PARTIES LISTED BELOW Regarding: Fifth Circuit Statement on Petitions for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc

No. 09-30708, Elizabeth Hassinger, et al v. JP Morgan Chase USDC No. 2:06-CV-2931 --------------------------------------------------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 plaintiffs-appellants pay to defendant-appellee the costs on appeal. Sincerely, LYLE W. CAYCE, Clerk

By:_________________________ Joseph M. Armato, Deputy Clerk 504-310-7651

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-30708

Document: 00511219496

Page: 2

Date Filed: 08/30/2010

Enclosures Mr. Ronald S. Betman Ms. Monika Blacha Ms. Linda T. Coberly Mrs. Meredith Anne Cunningham Mr. George Chester Freeman III Mr. John William Hite III Mr. Michael Ray Robinson Mr. Robert Y. Sperling