United States v. Rakesh Hirani
Filing
OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Steven M. Colloton and James E. Gritzner AUTHORING JUDGE:James E. Gritzner (PUBLISHED) [4404687] [15-1583]
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
May 31, 2016
Mr. Scott Eric Bratton
MARGARET W. WONG & ASSOCIATES CO., LPA
3150 Chester Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44114
RE: 15-1583 United States v. Rakesh Hirani
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
AMT
Enclosure(s)
cc:
Mr. Troy David Liggett
Ms. Denise M. Lucks
Ms. Danielle Kathleen Schuessler
Ms. Margaret Wong
District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 4:14-cv-03025-JFB
Appellate Case: 15-1583
Page: 1
Date Filed: 05/31/2016 Entry ID: 4404687
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?