United States v. United States District Court

875 F.3d 1177
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. United States District Court. Read the opinion of the Court — 875 F.3d 1200
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided November 21, 2017·No. 17-72917·Published

Opinion

ORDER

Before the court is the government’s emergency motion for a stay of our order of November 16, 2017, which denied the government’s petition for a writ of mandamus and lifted a temporary stay that we had previously imposed. As the order denying mandamus relief was effective immediately upon its issuance, see Ellis v. U.S. Dist. Court, 360 F.3d 1022, 1023 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc), jurisdiction now lies with the district court, and not with this court. Compare Daimler-Benz Aktiengesellschaft v. U.S: Dist. Court, 805 F.2d 340, 341-42 (10th Cir. 1986) (ordering a stay of district court proceedings before any order denying or granting mandamus had issued). If the government seeks further relief from this court, it must do so in a new petition for mandamus. The government’s emergency motion for a stay is therefore DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

United States v. United States District Court, 875 F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2017).

875 F.3d 1177 (United States v. United States District Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related