In an appeal from the denial of plaintiff's action to enforce a settlement agreement it claimed the parties reached during the pendency of its suit for specific performance of a real estate transaction, the district court's order is affirmed where the parties had failed to reach agreement on a material element of the case.

Read T Street Dev., LLC v. Dereje & Dereje, No. 08-7123

Appellate Information

Argued October 9, 2009

Decided November 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

Counsel

For Appellants:

Thomas F. Murphy and Robert E. Greenberg, Friedlander Misler, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Emil Hirsch and Steven A. Pozefsky, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Washington DC

Defendant's drug and firearm sentence is affirmed where: 1) 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2) permitted courts to consider only the consequences of Sentencing Guidelines changes and did not reopen other elements of a sentence; and 2) the district court acted within its discretion in denying a sentence reduction based on a Guidelines amendment.

Read US v. Lafayette, No. 08-3024

Appellate Information

Argued October 8, 2009

Decided November 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

Counsel

For Appellant:

A. D. Martin, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Peter S. Smith, Roy W. McLeese III, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

In an appeal from a district court order striking plaintiff's attorney as counsel of record and terminating his status as an appellant from a bankruptcy court order, the order is affirmed where: 1) counsel was not a licensed attorney; and 2) he lacked prudential standing to appeal from the bankruptcy court's order.

Read In the Matter of: Greater Southeast Cmty. Hosp. Found., Inc., No. 08-7089

Appellate Information

Argued September 18, 2009

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Henderson

Counsel

For Appellants:

Dennis Lane and Janet M. Nesse, Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Patrick J. Potter, Stephen E. Leach and D. Marc Sarata, Leach Travell Britt PC, McLean, VA

In a Privacy Act action against the Bureau of Prisons concerning the loss of plaintiff-prisoner's good-time credits, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where: 1) inmate records were exempt from the relevant provisions of the Privacy Act; and 2) plaintiff's damages claim was not cognizable unless plaintiff first secured relief through a writ of habeas corpus.

Read Skinner v. US Dep't of Justice, No. 05-5284

Appellate Information

Argued September 14, 2009

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Garland

Counsel

For Appellant:

Yvonne M. Williams and Anthony F. Shelley, Washington, DC

Frank A. Skinner, pro se

For Appellees:

W. Mark Nebeker and R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

In an appeal from an order of the district court granting a petition to enforce subpoenas issued to pharmaceutical company officers in the course of an ongoing Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation into agreements among companies suspected of unlawfully delaying entry of lower-cost generic versions of a drug, the order is affirmed where the FTC was permitted to record depositions by videotape in addition to stenographically.

Read FTC v. Tarriff, No. 08-5205

Appellate Information

Argued October 8, 2009

Decided October 23, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Sentelle

Counsel

For Appellants:

Eric Grannon, J. Mark Gidley, Christopher M. Curran, White & Case LLP, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Lawrence DeMille-Wagman, Willard K. Tom, John F. Daly, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC

Defendant's firearm possession conviction is affirmed where defendant's voluntary statement that he was publicly drinking in violation of local law tipped the balance from providing a mere hunch to articulable suspicion of possible ongoing criminal wrongdoing, giving an officer reasonable suspicion to search him.

Read US v. Jones, No. 07-3025

Appellate Information

Argued September 14, 2009

Decided October 23, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Rogers

Counsel

For Appellant:

Dennis M. Hart, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Leslie A. Gerardo, Roy W. McLeese III and Chrisellen R. Kolb, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

In petitions for review of a Surface Transportation Board regulation that provided two simplified methods for resolving rail rate disputes too small to bring under ordinary procedures, the petitions are granted where, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, the Board's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking failed to give notice of a significant change that surfaced only in the final rule.  (Superseding opinion)

Read CSX Transp., Inc. v. STB, No. 07-1369

Appellate Information

Argued April 7, 2009

Decided October 23, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

In an appeal from the Tax Court's determination that the taxpayers owed alternative minimum tax (AMT), the order is affirmed where the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 made it crystal clear that Congress intended the 90% cap on the AMT foreign tax credit to supersede any preexisting treaty obligation with which it conflicted.

Read Jamieson v. Comm'r of Internal Rev. Serv., No. 08-1253

Appellate Information

Decided October 16, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Williams

Counsel

For Appellants:

William David Jamieson and Judith A. Jamieson, pro se.

For Appellee:

Robert W. Metzler and Melissa Briggs, Attorneys, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC

In an action claiming that the Department of Commerce (DOC) violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) by failing to document aspects of the North American Competitiveness Council's meetings, dismissal of the action is reversed where plaintiff had standing to pursue the action because the DOC was subject to an array of FACA obligations concerning the Council and its sub-groups that were entirely within its power to discharge, and thus the DOC had the power to redress the failure to disclose the information at issue.

Read Judicial Watch, Inc. v. US Dept. of Commerce, No. 08-5490

Appellate Information

Argued September 21, 2009

Decided October 9, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Williams

Counsel

For Appellant:

James F. Peterson and Paul J. Orfanedes, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Abby C. Wright, Tony West, Mark B. Stern, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC

In an action challenging the Food and Drug Administration's approval of an anthrax vaccine and seeking to enjoin the Defense Department from administering it to military personnel, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where: 1) the court deferred to the FDA's judgment that the vaccine was effective regardless of the route of exposure; and 2) the FDA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in resting a finding of effectiveness on the results of a challenged study.

Read Rempfer v. Sharfstein, No. 08-5117

Appellate Information

Argued April 20, 2009

Decided September 29, 2009

Counsel

For Appellants:

John J. Michels Jr. and Mark S. Zaid, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Chicago, IL

For Appellees:

Melissa N. Patterson, Michael F. Hertz, Jeffrey A. Taylor and Mark B. Stern, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC