Stephany Draper v. Carolyn W. Colvin
Filing
OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Diana E. Murphy, Lavenski R. Smith and Raymond W. Gruender AUTHORING JUDGE:Raymond W. Gruender (PUBLISHED) [4249931] [13-2757]
United States Court of Appeals
For The Eighth Circuit
Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse
111 South 10th Street, Room 24.329
St. Louis, Missouri 63102
VOICE (314) 244-2400
FAX (314) 244-2780
www.ca8.uscourts.gov
Michael E. Gans
Clerk of Court
March 03, 2015
Mr. R. Eric Solem
SOLEM & MACK
Suite 900
3333 S. Bannock Street
Englewood, CO 80110
RE: 13-2757 Stephany Draper v. Carolyn W. Colvin
Dear Counsel:
The court today issued an opinion in this case. Judgment in accordance with the opinion
was also entered today. The opinion will be released to the public at 10:00 a.m. today. Please
hold the opinion in confidence until that time.
Please review Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Eighth Circuit Rules on postsubmission procedure to ensure that any contemplated filing is timely and in compliance with the
rules. Note particularly that petitions for rehearing and petitions for rehearing en banc must be
received in the clerk's office within 45 days of the date of the entry of judgment. Counsel-filed
petitions must be filed electronically in CM/ECF. Paper copies are not required. No grace period
for mailing is allowed, and the date of the postmark is irrelevant, for pro-se-filed petitions. Any
petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc which is not received within the 45 day
period for filing permitted by FRAP 40 may be denied as untimely.
Michael E. Gans
Clerk of Court
MDS
Enclosure(s)
cc:
Ms. Stephanie Carlson Bengford
Mr. Richard D. Casey
Mr. Joseph A. Haas
Mr. Kevin Koliner
Mr. Ron M. Landsman
Mr. John Jay Lee
Mr. Craig C. Reaves
District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 4:12-cv-04091-KES
Appellate Case: 13-2757
Page: 1
Date Filed: 03/03/2015 Entry ID: 4249931
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?