Amanda Culbertson, et al v. Pat Lykos, et al

Filing

PUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-20569 Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, and Remanded 13-20751 Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, and Remanded ] Judge: TMR , Judge: JWE , Judge: LHS Mandate pull date is 07/13/2015 [13-20569, 13-20751]

Case: 13-20569

Document: 00513087142

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/22/2015

United States Court of Appeals
FIFTH CIRCUIT
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
LYLE W. CAYCE
CLERK

TEL. [phone]
600 S. MAESTRI PLACE
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130

June 22, 2015
MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL OR PARTIES LISTED BELOW
Regarding:

Fifth Circuit Statement on Petitions for Rehearing
or Rehearing En Banc

No. 13-20569

Amanda Culbertson, et al v. Pat Lykos, et al
USDC No. 4:12-CV-3644
--------------------------------------------------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 5TH Cir. R.s 35, 39, and 41 govern
costs, rehearings, and mandates. 5TH Cir. R.s 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 5TH 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. 5TH 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.

Case: 13-20569

Document: 00513087142

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/22/2015

Sincerely,
LYLE W. CAYCE, Clerk

By: _______________________
Joseph M. Armato, Deputy Clerk
Enclosure(s)
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.

Mary E. Baker
Russell Louis Cook Jr.
Russell Scott Cook
Katharine D. David
Melissa Anne Jacobs
Stacy R. Obenhaus
Bruce Stephen Powers
Charles Michael Seely