Bayala v. United States Department of Homeland Security

D.C. Circuit

Bayala v. United States Department of Homeland Security

599 F. App'x 389

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided March 9, 2015·No. No. 14-5279·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the response thereto, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be denied. The merits of the parties’ positions are not so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam).

Because the court has determined that summary disposition is not in order, the Clerk is instructed to calendar this case for presentation to a merits panel.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the response thereto, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be denied. The merits of the parties’ positions are not so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam).

Because the court has determined that summary disposition is not in order, the Clerk is instructed to calendar this case for presentation to a merits panel.

Bayala v. United States Department of Homeland Security, 599 F. App'x 389 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

Pincite

599 F. App'x 389 (Bayala v. United States Department of Homeland Security) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related