Witt v. Department of the Air Force et al

Filing 181

Civil Appeals Docketing Statement by Defendants Department of the Air Force, Donald H Rumsfeld, Mary L Walker, Michael W Wynne, to be transmitted by Clerk to Circuit Court of Appeals. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit)(Phipps, Peter)

Witt v. Department of the Air Force et al

Doc. 181

A-11 (rev. 7/00)

Page 1 of 2

USCA DOCKET # (IF KNOWN)

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT
PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY.

TITLE IN FULL:

DISTRICT: W.D. Wash.

JUDGE: Ronald B. Leighton

MAJOR MARGARET WITT, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, ROBERT M. GATES, MICHAEL B. DONLEY, and COLONEL JANETTE L. MOORE-HARBERT, Defendants

DISTRICT COURT NUMBER: 06-5195 RBL DATE NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED: IS THIS A CROSS APPEAL? YES

November 23, 2010

IF THIS MATTER HAS BEEN BEFORE THIS COURT PREVIOUSLY, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DOCKET NUMBER AND CITATION (IF ANY):

06-35644; 527 F.3d 806; 548 F.3d 1264

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF ACTION AND RESULT BELOW:

The district court held unconstitutional plaintiff's discharge pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 654 and its implementing regulations. The district court ordered plaintiff reinstated to the military, subject to meeting applicable requirements respecting qualifications for continued service.
PRINCIPAL ISSUES PROPOSED TO BE RAISED ON APPEAL:

Whether plaintiff's discharge pursuant to 10 U.S.C 654 and its implementing regulations was constitutional and whether plaintiff should have been ordered reinstated to the military, subject to meeting applicable requirements respecting qualifications for continued service.
PLEASE IDENTIFY ANY OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDING THAT MAY HAVE A BEARING ON THIS CASE (INCLUDE PENDING DISTRICT COURT POST-JUDGMENT MOTIONS):

Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, No. 10-56634

DOES THIS APPEAL INVOLVE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

Possibility of Settlement Likelihood that intervening precedent will control outcome of appeal Likelihood of a motion to expedite or to stay the appeal, or other procedural matters (Specify) Any other information relevant to the inclusion of this case in the Mediation Program Possibility parties would stipulate to binding award by Appellate Commissioner in lieu of submission to judges

Dockets.Justia.com

Page 2 of 2

LOWER COURT INFORMATION
JURISDICTION FEDERAL FEDERAL QUESTION DIVERSITY OTHER (SPECIFY): APPELLATE FINAL DECISION OF DISTRICT COURT INTERLOCUTORY DECISION APPEALABLE AS OF RIGHT INTERLOCUTORY ORDER CERTIFIED BY DISTRICT JUDGE (SPECIFY): DISTRICT COURT DISPOSITION TYPE OF JUDGMENT/ORDER APPEALED DEFAULT JUDGMENT DISMISSAL/JURISDICTION DISMISSAL/MERITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT JUDGMENT/COURT DECISION JUDGMENT/JURY VERDICT DECLARATORY JUDGMENT JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OTHER (SPECIFY): RELIEF DAMAGES: SOUGHT $

AWARDED $ INJUNCTIONS: PRELIMINARY PERMANENT GRANTED DENIED ATTORNEY FEES: SOUGHT PENDING COSTS: $ $

AWARDED $ OTHER (SPECIFY):

CERTIFICATION OF COUNSEL
I CERTIFY THAT: 1. COPIES OF ORDER/JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM ARE ATTACHED. 2. A CURRENT SERVICE LIST OR REPRESENTATION STATEMENT WITH TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBERS IS ATTACHED (SEE 9TH CIR. RULE 3-2). 3. A COPY OF THIS CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT WAS SERVED IN COMPLIANCE WITH FRAP 25. 4. I UNDERSTAND THAT FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THESE FILING REQUIREMENTS MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS, INCLUDING DISMISSAL OF THIS APPEAL.

Peter J. Phipps

Signature

November 23, 2010 Date

COUNSEL WHO COMPLETED THIS FORM
NAME FIRM
Peter J. Phipps

United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch

ADDRESS P.O. Box 883 Ben Franklin Station CITY E-MAIL FAX
Washington

STATE DC TELEPHONE [phone]

ZIP CODE 20044

[e-mail]

[phone]
**THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE FILED IN DISTRICT COURT WITH THE NOTICE OF APPEAL. ** **IF FILED LATE, IT SHOULD BE FILED DIRECTLY WITH THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS.**