Sczygelski v. United States Customs & Border Protection
599 F. App'x 390
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Sczygelski v. United States Customs & Border Protection. Read the opinion of the Court — 624 F. App'x 1 →
Opinion
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion 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 cu-riam).
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
Sczygelski v. United States Customs & Border Protection, 599 F. App'x 390 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
599 F. App'x 390 (Sczygelski v. United States Customs & Border Protection) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Ralph L. Stanley, Administrator, Urban Mass Transportation Administration
819 F.2d 294 (D.C. Circuit, 1987)