[Al Norris]

An update to three cases at the 9th Circuit.

I'm posting here, so I don't have to duplicate the posts in the individual threads and because the third case has no thread (as yet).

In Richards v. Prieto:

06/04/2012 45 Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart Motion to hear this case before the panel which will hear case 10-56971. Date of service: 06/04/2012. [8200863] (DK)

06/19/2012 46 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GS): The appellants’ motion to lift the stay of appellate proceedings in No. 11- 16255 is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in No. 11-16255. [8220426] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM)

Case #10-56971 is the Peruta case... Which is the next entry.

05/18/2012 84 Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 05/18/2012. [8184252] (CDM)

05/22/2012 85 Filed (ECF) Appellee William D. Gore response opposing motion (,motion to lift stay). Date of service: 05/22/2012. [8186780] (JC)

05/25/2012 86 COURT DELETED INCORRECT/DUPLICATE ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [87]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta Motion to lift stay. Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8191708] (CDM)

05/25/2012 87 COURT-ENTERED FILING (to replace [86] with correct filing type). Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta reply to response (motion to lift stay). Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8192084] (ASW)

06/01/2012 88 Filed (ECF) Appellants Leslie Buncher, California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Mark Cleary, James Dodd, Michelle Laxson and Edward Peruta citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 06/01/2012. [8199885] (CDM)

06/19/2012 89 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GS): The appellants motion to lift the stay of appellate proceedings in No. 11- 16255 is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in No. 11-16255. [8220426] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM)

I think that last entry means that the stay is also lifted in Peruta, but I could be wrong. Otherwise, why would the clerk make the entry about the other case (Richards)?

Current status of Birdt v. Beck at the 9th:

05/26/2012 10 Submitted (ECF) Opening brief for review. Submitted by Appellant Jonathan Birdt. Date of service: 05/26/2012. [8192964]--[COURT UPDATE: Removed Excerpts of Record (notified party filed in paper format only). Resent NDA. 05/30/2012 by RY] (JB)

05/31/2012 11 Filed clerk order: The opening brief [10] submitted by Jonathan Birdt is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: blue. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate ECF. [8196616] (WP)

06/01/2012 12 Filed Appellant Jonathan Birdt excerpts of record in 3 volumes. Served on 05/26/2012. [8200196] (WP)

06/07/2012 13 Received 7 paper copies of Opening brief [10] filed by Jonathan Birdt. [8206335] (SD)

At issue?

Did the District Court err in finding, under an intermediate scrutiny standard, that Defendants were justified in denying Appellants’ Fundamental Rights under the Second Amendment to possess a firearm for self-defense, outside of the home, by denying his application for a permit to carry a concealed weapon (hereinafter CCW Permit) by determining that there was a nexus between criminals who commit crimes and law abiding citizens seeking statutory permits to exercise their Fundamental Rights who might then commit a homicide because they were granted a permit?

Jon Birdt waives oral argument.

The brief is short and to the point; terse would be a word to describe this brief. Nonetheless, it is of higher caliber than we've seen from this plaintiff to date.