DOCSLIB.ORG

“Recent Fifth Circuit Opinions and Their Ethical Implications” [July 29, 1999 - June 14, 2000]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
“Recent Fifth Circuit Opinions and Their Ethical Implications” [July 29, 1999 - June 14, 2000] “RECENT FIFTH CIRCUIT OPINIONS AND THEIR ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS” [JULY 29, 1999 - JUNE 14, 2000] F. R. (BUCK) FILES, JR. Bain, Files, Jarrett & Bain, P.C. 109 West Ferguson Tyler, Texas 75702 903-595-3573 Fax 903-597-7322 [email protected] Quote of the Year “This is a classic case of a judge making a mountain out of a molehill.” In Re Douglas C. Greene, ___F.3d___, 2000 WL 691272 (5th Cir. 2000), Vacating the sanctions award imposed by Hon. John McBryde ANNUAL ADVANCED CRIMINAL LAW COURSE 2000 July 17-20, 2000 San Antonio, Texas Chapter 37 Chapter 37 Recent Fifth Circuit Opinions... Table of Contents I. Introduction ....................................................... 1 A. Preface to the Paper ........................................ 1 B. Goal and Scope of the Paper ................................... 1 C. What’s in This Paper ........................................ 1 D. What’s Not in This Paper ..................................... 2 E. Form of the Paper .......................................... 2 F. Icons ................................................... 2 G. The Appendices ........................................... 2 II. The Pending Fifth Circuit Review Case .................................... 2 A. Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8) .......................... 2 1. United States v. Emerson (5th Cir. #99-10331) ..................... 2 THE PROBLEM: 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8) -- constitutionality .......... 2 III. The Appeals Cases ................................................. 4 A. The Record on Appeal ....................................... 4 1. United States v. Thibodeaux, 211 F.3d 910 (5th Cir. 2000) ............. 4 THE PROBLEM: Appeal by the government -- approval to proceed under 18 U.S.C. § 3472(b) [This is a case of semi-first impression.] ....................................... 4 2. United States v. Gieger, 190 F.3d 661 (5th Cir. 1999) ................ 5 THE PROBLEM: Appeal -- incomplete record on appeal ............ 5 B. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel on Appeal ......................... 6 1. United States v. Williamson, 183 F.3d 458 (5th Cir. 1999) ............. 6 THE PROBLEM: Appeal -- ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to cite directly controlling precedent) ................. 6 2. United States v. Phillips, 210 F.3d 345 (5th Cir. 2000) ................ 8 THE PROBLEM: Appeal -- ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to raise a meritorious appellate issue) ................. 8 3. United States v. Castano, 211 F.3d 871 (5th Cir. 2000) ............... 10 THE PROBLEM: Appeal -- ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to appeal) .................................. 10 IV. The Pending En Banc Cases .......................................... 12 A. Interstate Commerce ....................................... 12 1. United States v. Cisneros, 194 F. 3d 626 (5th Cir. 1999) .............. 13 THE PROBLEM: Interstate commerce -- telephone calls from Mexico to Texas [This is a case of first impression.] ........... 13 2. United States v. Marek, 198 F.3d 532 (5th Cir. 1999) ............... 15 THE PROBLEM: Interstate commerce -- intrastate transfer of funds via Western Union [This is a case of first impression.] .... 15 B. “Simulated Lascivious Exhibition” .............................. 16 1. United States v. Reinhart, 190 F.3d 290 (5th Cir. 1999) .............. 16 THE PROBLEM: 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(E) -- “simulated lascivious exhibition” [This is a case of first impression.] ............... 16 V. The Specific Statutes Cases ........................................... 19 A. 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) ......................................... 19 1. United States v. Johnson, 194 F.3d 657 (5th Cir. 1999) .............. 19 i Recent Fifth Circuit Opinions... Chapter 37 THE PROBLEM: Interstate commerce -- sufficient nexus to support the defendant’s plea of guilty ..................... 19 B. 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1) ...................................... 21 1. United States v. Olaniyi-Oke, 199 F.3d 767 (5th Cir. 1999) ............ 21 THE PROBLEM: 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1) -- “promotion” or “concealment” .................................... 21 C. 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) ....................................... 22 1. United States v. Ramos-Garcia, 184 F.3d 463 (5th Cir. 1999) .......... 22 THE PROBLEM: 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) -- knowledge of the marijuana ........................................ 22 D. 21 U.S.C. § 861(a)(2) ....................................... 23 1. United States v. Cyprian, 197 F.3d 736 (5th Cir. 1999) .............. 23 THE PROBLEM: 21 U.S.C. § 861(a)(2) -- “use of a child” [This is a case of first impression.] ....................... 23 E. 8 U.S.C. § 1326 .......................................... 25 1. United States v. Angeles-Mascote, 206 F.3d 529 (5th Cir. 2000) ......... 25 THE PROBLEM: 8 U.S.C. § 1326 -- “being found in” the United States [This is a case of first impression.] ................... 25 VI. The Confession Case ............................................... 26 A. The Interpreter’s Participation ................................ 26 1. United States v. Martinez-Gaytan, ___F.3d___, 2000 WL 719595 (5th Cir. June 5, 2000) ................................ 26 THE PROBLEM: Confessions -- translator’s absence from a suppression hearing [This is a case of first impression.] ......... 26 VII. The Search Cases ................................................ 28 A. Continued Detention After a Legitimate Justification for a Traffic Stop Had Ended ............................................. 28 1. United States v. Dortch, 199 F.3d 193 (5th Cir. 1999) ............... 28 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- continued detention after a legitimate justification for traffic stop had ended ............ 28 B. The “Collective Knowledge” Doctrine ............................ 31 1. United States v. Ibarra-Sanchez, 199 F.3d 753 (5th Cir. 1999) .......... 31 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- the “collective knowledge” doctrine ......................................... 31 C. The “Independent Source” Doctrine ............................. 33 1. United States v. Grosenheider, 200 F.3d 321 (5th Cir. 2000) ........... 33 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- the “independent source” doctrine ......................................... 33 D. The Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule ..................................................... 36 1. United States v. Cherna, 184 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 1999) ............... 36 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule ........................ 36 E. Inventory Searches ........................................ 38 1. United States v. Lage, 183 F.3d 374 (5th Cir. 1999) ................ 38 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- the inventory search ........ 38 F. Border Searches .......................................... 40 1. United States v. Zapata-Ibarra, ___F.3d___, 2000 WL 650017 (5th Cir. May 19, 2000) .................................. 40 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- border searches ii Chapter 37 Recent Fifth Circuit Opinions... (24 miles from the border) ............................. 40 2. United States v. Orozco, 191 F.3d 578 (5th Cir. 1999) ............... 42 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- border searches (200-300 miles from the border) ......................... 42 3. United States v. Morales, 191 F.3d 602 (5th Cir. 1999) .............. 44 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- border searches (150 miles from the border) ............................ 44 4. United States v. Chavez-Chavez, 205 F.3d 145 (5th Cir. 2000) .......... 45 THE PROBLEM: Search and seizure -- border searches (150-160 miles from the border) ......................... 46 VIII. The Plea Agreement and Use Immunity Agreement Cases ..................... 47 A. Breach of a Plea Agreement by the Government ..................... 48 1. United States v. Saling, 205 F.3d 764 (5th Cir. 2000) ................ 48 THE PROBLEM: Plea agreements -- breach by the government ...... 48 B. Breach of a Use Immunity Agreement by the Defendant ................ 49 1. United States v. Cantu, 185 F.3d 298 (5th Cir. 1999) ................ 49 THE PROBLEM: Use immunity agreements -- breach by the defendant ........................................ 49 IX. The Rule 11 Cases ................................................ 50 A. Judicial Participation in Plea Negotiations ......................... 51 1. United States v. Rodriguez, 197 F.3d 156 (5th Cir. 1999) ............. 51 THE PROBLEM: Rule 11 -- judicial participation in plea negotiations ...................................... 51 B. Failure to Inquire as to Waiver of Appeal ......................... 52 1. United States v. Robinson, 187 F.3d 516 (5th Cir. 1999) .............. 53 THE PROBLEM: Rule 11 -- failure to inquire as to waiver of appeal ........................................ 53 C. Failure to Advise as to the Punishment Range ...................... 53 1. United States v. Vasquez-Bernal, 197 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 1999) ......... 54 THE PROBLEM: Rule 11 -- failure to advise as to punishment range ........................................... 54 D. Failure to Advise as to Restitution .............................. 55 1. United States v. Glinsey, 209 F.3d 386 (5th Cir. 2000) ............... 55 THE PROBLEM: Rule 11 -- failure to advise as to restitution ........ 55 E. Failure to Inquire as to the Voluntariness of the Plea ................. 56 1. United States v. Smith, 184 F.3d 415 (5th Cir. 1999) ................ 56 THE PROBLEM: Rule 11 -- failure to inquire as to the voluntariness of the plea .............................. 56 X. The Deportation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Administration of Barack Obama, 2011 Nominations Submitted to The
    Administration of Barack Obama, 2011 Nominations Submitted to the Senate December 16, 2011 The following list does not include promotions of members of the Uniformed Services, nominations to the Service Academies, or nominations of Foreign Service Officers. Submitted January 5 Arenda L. Wright Allen, of Virginia, to be U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia, vice Jerome B. Friedman, retired. Anthony J. Battaglia, of California, to be U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of California, vice M. James Lorenz, retired. Cathy Bissoon, of Pennsylvania, to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania, vice Thomas M. Hardiman, elevated. James Emanuel Boasberg, of the District of Columbia, to be U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia, vice Thomas F. Hogan, retired. Vincent L. Briccetti, of New York, to be U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, vice Kimba M. Wood, retired. Louis B. Butler, Jr., of Wisconsin, to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin, vice John C. Shabaz, retired. Susan L. Carney, of Connecticut, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Second Circuit, vice Barrington D. Parker, retired. Claire C. Cecchi, of New Jersey, to be U.S. District Judge for the District of New Jersey, vice Joseph A. Greenaway, elevated. Edward Milton Chen, of California, to be U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California, vice Martin J. Jenkins, resigned. Max Oliver Cogburn, Jr., of North Carolina, to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina, vice Lacy H.
    [Show full text]
  • A View from the Bench Municipal Appellate Judge Remembers (Almost) Playing Basketball for UTEP the Year They Won It All by Ki R K Co O P E R
    www.elpasobar.com Spring 2017 A View from the Bench Municipal Appellate Judge Remembers (Almost) Playing Basketball for UTEP the Year They Won It All BY KIR K COOPER PAGE 6 YOUNG LAWYER SPOTLIGHTS SENIOR LAWYER INTERVIEWS Felix Valenzuela Dean Hester BY CARLOS MALDONADO BY KIR K COOPER PAGES 12 PAGE 10 Fall 2016 3 TABLE OF CON T EN T S President´s Page .................................................. 4 Making A Difference On Indifference ............. 14 A View From The Bench .................................... 6 Program Helps Non-Custodial Parents Senior Lawyer Interview: Dean Hester ............ 10 in El Paso County ............................................. 16 Young Lawyer Spotlight: Felix Valenzuela ....... 12 JUSTICE FOR ALL: Putting Words El Paso’s Drug Courts Celebrate National Into Action ........................................................ 17 Impaired Driving Prevention Month ............... 13 2017 General Memberships Meetings ............. 18 DWI Courts Unite for National Impaired Tribute box ........................................................ 20 Driving Prevention Month ............................... 13 The editors ......................................................... 22 Mediations - Aggressive and creative Arbitrations - Evidence based awards HardieMediation.com Bill Hardie See our online calendar Wells Fargo Bank Plaza / 915.845.6400 / [email protected] Spring 2017 4 PRESIDEN T ’S PAGE State Bar of Texas Awards s I reflect on this past year as your Bar Association president, I keep Award of Merit
    [Show full text]
  • Members by Circuit (As of January 3, 2017)
    Federal Judges Association - Members by Circuit (as of January 3, 2017) 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Bruce M. Selya Jeffrey R. Howard Kermit Victor Lipez Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson Sandra L. Lynch United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby George Z. Singal John A. Woodcock, Jr. Jon David LeVy Nancy Torresen United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs Denise Jefferson Casper Douglas P. Woodlock F. Dennis Saylor George A. O'Toole, Jr. Indira Talwani Leo T. Sorokin Mark G. Mastroianni Mark L. Wolf Michael A. Ponsor Patti B. Saris Richard G. Stearns Timothy S. Hillman William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr. Joseph N. LaPlante Landya B. McCafferty Paul J. Barbadoro SteVen J. McAuliffe United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Daniel R. Dominguez Francisco Augusto Besosa Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. Jay A. Garcia-Gregory Juan M. Perez-Gimenez Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez United States District Court District of Rhode Island Ernest C. Torres John J. McConnell, Jr. Mary M. Lisi William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Barrington D. Parker, Jr. Christopher F. Droney Dennis Jacobs Denny Chin Gerard E. Lynch Guido Calabresi John Walker, Jr. Jon O. Newman Jose A. Cabranes Peter W. Hall Pierre N. LeVal Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Reena Raggi Robert A. Katzmann Robert D. Sack United States District Court District of Connecticut Alan H. NeVas, Sr. Alfred V. Covello Alvin W. Thompson Dominic J. Squatrito Ellen B.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Law Judicial Clerks List
    Texas Law Judicial Clerks List This list includes Texas Law alumni who reported their clerkships to the Judicial Clerkship Program – or whose names were published in the Judicial Yellow Book or Martindale Hubbell – and includes those who clerked during the recent past for judges who are currently active. There are some judges and courts for which few Texas Law alumni have clerked – in these cases we have listed alumni who clerked further back or who clerked for judges who are no longer active. Dates following a law clerk or judge’s name indicate year of graduation from the University of Texas School of Law. Retired or deceased judges, or those who has been appointed to another court, are listed at the end of each court section and denoted (*). Those who wish to use the information on this list will need to independently verify the information being used. Federal Courts U.S. Supreme Court ............................................................................................................. 2 U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals ............................................................................................. 3 First Circuit Second Circuit Third Circuit Fourth Circuit Fifth Circuit Sixth Circuit Seventh Circuit Eighth Circuit Ninth Circuit Tenth Circuit Eleventh Circuit Federal Circuit District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Courts of Limited Jurisdiction ...................................................................................... 9 Executive Office for Immigration Review U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces U.S. Court of Appeals for Veteran Claims U.S. Court of Federal Claims U.S. Court of International Trade U.S. Tax Court U.S. District Courts (listed alphabetically by state) ............................................................ 10 State Courts State Appellate Courts (listed alphabetically by state) ........................................................ 25 State District & County Courts (listed alphabetically by state) ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery Gone Bad
    DISCOVERY GONE BAD Sponsor: Young Lawyers Division CLE Credit: 1.0 Thursday, June 19, 2014 10:50 a.m. - 11:50 a.m. Ballroom B Northern Kentucky Convention Center Covington, Kentucky A NOTE CONCERNING THE PROGRAM MATERIALS The materials included in this Kentucky Bar Association Continuing Legal Education handbook are intended to provide current and accurate information about the subject matter covered. No representation or warranty is made concerning the application of the legal or other principles discussed by the instructors to any specific fact situation, nor is any prediction made concerning how any particular judge or jury will interpret or apply such principles. The proper interpretation or application of the principles discussed is a matter for the considered judgment of the individual legal practitioner. The faculty and staff of this Kentucky Bar Association CLE program disclaim liability therefore. Attorneys using these materials, or information otherwise conveyed during the program, in dealing with a specific legal matter have a duty to research original and current sources of authority. Printed by: Evolution Creative Solutions 7107 Shona Drive Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 Kentucky Bar Association TABLE OF CONTENTS The Presenters ................................................................................................................. i Report of the Parties' Planning Meeting .......................................................................... 1 Court Orders Regarding Discovery Disputes ................................................................... 5 Appendix Links to Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules ........................................................ 15 THE PRESENTERS Robert M. Croft, Jr. Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP 7620 Beech Spring Court Louisville, Kentucky 40241 (502) 540-2352 [email protected] ROBERT M. CROFT, JR. is an associate in Dinsmore’s Louisville and Lexington offices, where he is a member of the Product Liability and Toxic Tort Practice Groups.
    [Show full text]
  • LOCAL COURT CIVIL RULES with Proposed Amendments-Redlined Version
    LOCAL COURT CIVIL RULES WithAs Proposed AmendmentsAfter Feb. 28 Meeting Revised 3/16/2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................................. vi CV-1 ............................................................................................................................................. 1 CV-3 ............................................................................................................................................. 2 CV-5 ............................................................................................................................................. 34 CV-5.2 .......................................................................................................................................... 45 CV-6 DELETED .......................................................................................................................... 56 CV-7 ............................................................................................................................................. 67 CV-10 ........................................................................................................................................... 810 CV-15 NEW ................................................................................................................................. 911 CV-16 .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS Criminal Justice Section Program
    SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT & THE 5TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS Criminal Justice Section Program Buck Files Bain, Files, Jarrett, Bain & Harrison, P.C. 109 West Ferguson Street Tyler, Texas 75702-7203 (903) 595-3573 Friday, June 11, 2010 3:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. F. R. (Buck) Files, Jr. is a shareholder in the firm of Bain, Files, Jarrett, Bain and Harrison, P.C., in Tyler, Texas. He holds board certifications in criminal law from the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and in criminal trial advocacy from the National Board of Trial Advocacy. Buck is a charter member and former director of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association. In 2007, he was honored by a resolution of TCDLA’s board of directors for having had more than 100 of his columns – “The Federal Corner” – published in the VOICE for the Defense. Buck is currently serving as a member of the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and as Chair of the State Bar’s Continuing Legal Education Committee. He is a former member of the State Bar’s board of directors and was named “Outstanding Third Year Director” in 2007. He also received a State Bar Presidential Citation for his work as Co-Chair of the State Bar’s Task Force on the Qualifications of Habeas Counsel in Capital Cases. In 2004, he was named the Defense Lawyer of the Year by the Criminal Justice Section of the State Bar. Buck received his B.A. degree from Austin College (1960) and his M.L.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit As of 10/8/2020
    Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 10/8/2020 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Jeffrey R. Howard 0 Kermit Victor Lipez (Snr) Sandra L. Lynch Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby (Snr) 0 Jon David Levy George Z. Singal (Snr) Nancy Torresen John A. Woodcock, Jr. (Snr) United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs 0 Denise Jefferson Casper Timothy S. Hillman Mark G. Mastroianni George A. O'Toole, Jr. (Snr) Michael A. Ponsor (Snr) Patti B. Saris F. Dennis Saylor Leo T. Sorokin Richard G. Stearns Indira Talwani Mark L. Wolf (Snr) Douglas P. Woodlock (Snr) William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Paul J. Barbadoro 0 Joseph N. Laplante Steven J. McAuliffe (Snr) Landya B. McCafferty Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 10/8/2020 United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Francisco Augusto Besosa 0 Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez Daniel R. Dominguez (Snr) Jay A. Garcia-Gregory (Snr) Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez (Snr) United States District Court District of Rhode Island Mary M. Lisi (Snr) 0 John J. McConnell, Jr. William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Jose A. Cabranes 0 Guido Calabresi (Snr) Denny Chin Christopher F. Droney (Ret) Peter W. Hall Pierre N. Leval (Snr) Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Gerard E. Lynch (Snr) Jon O. Newman (Snr) Barrington D. Parker, Jr. (Snr) Reena Raggi (Snr) Robert D. Sack (Snr) John M.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2021
    Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 3/3/2021 International Trade United States Court of International Trade Timothy Reif 0 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Jeffrey R. Howard 0 Kermit Victor Lipez (Snr) Sandra L. Lynch Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby (Snr) 0 Jon David Levy George Z. Singal (Snr) Nancy Torresen John A. Woodcock, Jr. (Snr) United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs 0 Denise Jefferson Casper Timothy S. Hillman Mark G. Mastroianni George A. O'Toole, Jr. (Snr) Michael A. Ponsor (Snr) Patti B. Saris F. Dennis Saylor Leo T. Sorokin Richard G. Stearns Indira Talwani Mark L. Wolf (Snr) Douglas P. Woodlock (Snr) William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Paul J. Barbadoro 0 Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 3/3/2021 Joseph N. Laplante Steven J. McAuliffe (Snr) Landya B. McCafferty United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Francisco Augusto Besosa 0 Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez Daniel R. Dominguez (Snr) Jay A. Garcia-Gregory (Snr) Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. United States District Court District of Rhode Island Mary M. Lisi (Snr) 0 John J. McConnell, Jr. William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Joseph F. Bianco 0 Jose A. Cabranes Guido Calabresi (Snr) Denny Chin Christopher F. Droney (Ret) Peter W. Hall Pierre N. Leval (Snr) Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Gerard E. Lynch (Snr) Jon O. Newman (Snr) Barrington D.
    [Show full text]
  • Inter Partes Review: a New Paradigm in Patent Litigation
    Inter Partes Review: A New Paradigm in Patent Litigation Aashish Kapadia* I. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 114 II. Changes to Inter Partes Challenges Under the AIA .......................................... 115 A. Availability of Proceeding ...................................................................... 115 B. Duration and Procedure .......................................................................... 116 C. Patent Office Fees ................................................................................... 117 D. Basis for Instituting Review ................................................................... 118 E. Composition of Tribunal ......................................................................... 118 F. Standard of Evidentiary Review and Discovery ...................................... 119 G. Estoppel and Settlement .......................................................................... 119 III. Statistics of Inter Partes Review ...................................................................... 121 A. Managing Administrative Resources ...................................................... 121 B. Technology Distribution ......................................................................... 122 C. Preliminary Responses ............................................................................ 123 D. PTAB Trials ............................................................................................ 124 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Hopwood V. Texas (District Court Order to Close Case)
    CHERYL L. HOPWOOD, et al. vs. STATE OF TEXAS, et al. NO. A 92 CA 563 SS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AUSTIN DIVISION 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10658 July 24, 2001, Decided July 24, 2001, Filed COUNSEL: [*1] For CHERYL J. HOPWOOD, plaintiff: Terral R. Smith, Locke Liddell & Sapp, L.L.P., Steven W. Smith, Law Offices of Steven W. Smith, Austin, TX. For CHERYL J. HOPWOOD, plaintiff: Michael P. McDonald, Vincent A. Mulloy, Michael E. Rosman, Washington, DC. For CHERYL J. HOPWOOD, plaintiff: R. Kenneth Wheeler, Wallace, Harris, Sims & Wheeler, Richmond, VA. For CHERYL J. HOPWOOD, plaintiff: Joseph A. Wallace, Paul J. Harris, Harris & Bush, Elkins, WV. For CHERYL J. HOPWOOD, plaintiff: Walter J. Scott, Jr., Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, TX. For DOUGLAS CARVELL, KENNETH ELLIOTT, DAVID . ROGERS, consolidated plaintiffs: Steven W. Smith, Law Offices of Steven W. Smith, Austin, TX. For DOUGLAS CARVELL, KENNETH ELLIOTT, DAVID . ROGERS, consolidated plaintiffs: R. Kenneth Wheeler, Wallace, Harris, Sims & Wheeler, Richmond, VA. For DOUGLAS CARVELL, KENNETH ELLIOTT, DAVID . ROGERS, consolidated plaintiffs: Joseph A. Wallace, Paul J. Harris, Harris & Bush, Elkins, WV. For DOUGLAS CARVELL, KENNETH ELLIOTT, DAVID . ROGERS, consolidated plaintiffs: Michael E. Rosman, Washington, DC. For DOUGLAS CARVELL, consolidated plaintiff: Walter J. Scott, Jr., Gibson, [*2] Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, TX. For STATE OF TEXAS, BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, THOMAS O. HICKS, MARIO E. RAMIREZ, ROBERT M. BERDAHL, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SCHOOL OF LAW, MARK G. YUDOF, STANLEY M. JOHANSON, defendants: Harry M. Reasoner, Betty R. Owens, Vinson & Elkins, L.L.P., Houston, TX.
    [Show full text]
  • Stephen D. Susman Partner
    Stephen D. Susman Partner Houston, Texas Phone: 713.653.7801 New York, New York Phone: 212.336.8331 [email protected] STEPHEN D. SUSMAN, P.C., born Houston, Texas; admitted to bar, 1965, Texas; 1999, District of Columbia; 2000, New York; 2002, Colorado. STEPHEN D. SUSMAN - TRIALS Revised: March 2, 2020 (1976 - Present) Style: Grouse River Outfitters Ltd v. Oracle Corporation United States District Court, Northern District of California, before the Judge: Honorable Laurel Beeler Opposing Counsel: Sarah M. Ray Nature of the Case: Fraud Trial Dates: July 9-15 ,2019 Glen Fallis Represented: Grouse River Outfitters Ltd. Result: Defense verdict, on appeal 647739v1/109031 Style: BTG International Inc. v. Wellstat Therapeutics Corporation Judge: Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster Opposing Counsel: Richard Scheff Nature of the Case: Breach of Contract Trial Dates: May 1-5, 2017 Represented: Wellstat Therapeutics Corporation Result: Client awarded judgment of $71 million. Style: Securities Industry & Financial Markets Ass’n v. Nasdaq and NYSE Judge: Chief Administrative Law Judge Brenda Murray of the SEC Opposing Counsel: Michael Warden, Sidley Austin LLP Nature of the Case: Petition to Deny Increases in Proprietary Data Fees Trial Dates: April 20-24, 2015 Represented: Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC Result: Pending post-trial briefing Style: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Samuel Wyly, et al. United States District Court, Southern District of New York, before the Judge: Honorable Shira A. Scheindlin Opposing Counsel: Bridgett Fitzpatrick and John Worlund of SEC Nature of the Case: Securities Fraud and Insider Trading - 2 - 647739v1/109031 March 31 – May 7, 2014 Jury Trial Trial Dates: July 2, 2014 Bench Trial August 4–7, 2014 Bench Trial Samuel Wyly Represented: Donald R.
    [Show full text]