Archive for December, 2016

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al. Appeal: MANDATE ISSUED to Clerk, U.S. District Court, Dec 29, 2016

Friday, December 30th, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
M A N D A T E
In accordance with the judgment of November 1, 2016, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41, this constitutes the formal mandate of this court.
END EXCERPT

FORSYTH v MPAA: PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, Dec 29, 2016

Friday, December 30th, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
Notice is hereby given that Plaintiff Timothy Forsyth appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from the Judgment entered in the above-captioned action on December 1, 2016, Dkt. No. 65 (attached hereto as Exhibit A), including the Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, dated November 10, […]

CEI v DOT: RESPONDENT FINAL BRIEF, Dec 28, 2016

Wednesday, December 28th, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
The Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary) reasonably concluded that e-cigarettes fall within the statutory ban on “smoking“ in aircraft.
. . .
The Secretary‘s regulatory definition, which includes e-cigarettes within the meaning of “smoking,“ furthers the statutory purpose of preserving cabin air quality, avoiding passenger and crew discomfort, and reducing crewmembers‘ exposure […]

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al. Appeal: APPELLANTS’ REPLY BRIEF, Dec 22, 2016

Thursday, December 22nd, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
This Court rejected this gamesmanship in the Corrective Statements Decision when it held that Defendants correctly objected to publishing the original preambles. It should do so again here because the district court’s revised preambles suffer from the same flaws as the preambles previously invalidated by this Court: The revised preambles unambiguously […]

FORSYTH v MPAA: STIPULATION AND ORDER, Dec 22, 2016

Thursday, December 22nd, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
Counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant NATO met and conferred by telephone and email regarding the briefing schedule and hearing date and agreed that Plaintiff’s response to Defendant NATO’s motion for attorneys’ fees shall be due January 24, 2017 and Defendant NATO’s reply in support of the motion for attorneys’ fees shall […]

DOCKET for FORSYTH v MPAA, Dec 15-24, 2016

Thursday, December 22nd, 2016

EXCERPT:
12/22/2016 Set/Reset Deadlines as to 66 MOTION for Attorney Fees . Motion Hearing previously set for 1/26/2017 Continued to 2/16/2017 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg.
12/24/2016 69 Transcript of Proceedings held on 10/28/2016, before Judge Richard Seeborg.
END EXCERPT

FORSYTH v MPAA: NOTICE OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, Dec 15, 2016

Friday, December 16th, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
The mandatory fee award provision of the anti-SLAPP statute is imperative “to deter [the] chilling” of First Amendment rights through “abuse of the judicial process.” NATO therefore respectfully requests that this Court award $189,671.25, in addition to the fees expected to be further incurred on this motion, proof of which will […]

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al. Appeal: ORDER, Dec 12, 2016

Monday, December 12th, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
It is ORDERED, on the court’s own motion, that this case be scheduled for oral argument on February 14, 2017, at 9:30 A.M. The composition of the argument panel will usually be revealed thirty days prior to the date of oral argument on the court’s web site at www.cadc.uscourts.gov.
. . […]

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al. Appeal: APPELLEE BRIEF, Dec 2, 2016

Friday, December 2nd, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
Although this Court already held that the corrective statements may, consistent with RICO and the First Amendment, compel the cigarette manufacturers to “reveal the previously hidden truth about their products,” the companies now argue that the district court somehow contravened this Court’s past rulings by adopting preambles stating “Here is […]

FORSYTH v MPAA: JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 12/1/16

Friday, December 2nd, 2016

The PDF is Here
EXCERPT:
This action having come before the Court, The Honorable Richard Seeborg, District Judge, presiding, and the issues having been duly heard and a decision having been duly rendered,
It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff take nothing and that the action be dismissed with prejudice.
END EXCERPT