Bright v. United States

Opinion

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit EDWARD L. BRIGHT, II, CLARENCE FORKNER, HOMER E. HAMILTON, DEBBIE M. HAMILTON, RICKY D. RUSSELL, BRADY J. STUART, and ROSE M. STUART, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and EARLEEN FAVERGUE, Plaintiff, V. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. 2010-1385 Appea1 from the United States District C0urt for the Western DiStrict; of Miss0uri in case n0. 09-CV-5014, Judge Richard E. D0rr. ON MOTION ORDER

BRIGHT V. US 2 Edward L. Bright et a1. (Bright) moves without oppo- sition to stay proceedings pending a final decision in Bright v. United States, No. 2009-5048. Bright also files a renewed motion to stay. Upon consideration thereof IT ls 0RDERED THAT: (1) The motion to stay proceedings is granted Bright is directed to inform the court within 30 days of date of issuance of the mandate in Br11ght v. Um`ted States, No. 2009-5048, how it believes this appeal should proceed The United States may also respond within that time. (2) The renewed motion to stay is denied as m0ot. FoR THE CoURT SEP 0 9 mm /s/ Jan H0rbaly Date;VTwWi f J an Horbaly C1erk cc: Mark F. Hearne, II, Esq. |:"_Ep Kathryn E. Kovacs, Esq. °R SEP_ U9:Z919 s20 .|AN HORBALY CLE!K