NO IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA. WICHITA AND AFFILIATED TRIBES, et al.
|
|
- Annis Gregory
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 1 NO IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA v. WICHITA AND AFFILIATED TRIBES, et al. DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES On Appeal from the July 9, 2018 Order from the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma No. 5:16-cv HE, Honorable Joe Heaton, Chief Judge REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED Mary Kathryn Nagle, NYB No Wilson Pipestem, OBA No Abi Fain, OBA No Pipestem Law, P.C. 320 S. Boston Ave., Suite 1705 Tulsa, OK (Office) mknagle@pipestemlaw.com wkpipestem@pipestemlaw.com afain@pipestemlaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant Caddo Nation of Oklahoma
2 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 2 COPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The Caddo Nation of Oklahoma, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 26.1, certifies that it has no stock and therefore no publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of its stock. s/mary Kathryn Nagle Mary Kathryn Nagle i
3 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES... iii I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND... 1 II. STANDARD OF REVIEW... 2 III. ARGUMENT... 3 A. The Caddo Nation Is A Federally Recognized Tribe B. The Caddo Nation s Claims Are Not Moot i. The Caddo Nation s Claims Are Not Moot Under Airport Neighbors ii. Future Development Is Not Speculative Because The Wichita Tribe Stated It Would Undertake This Development In The EA.. 5 iii. Ordering Consultation Would Constitute Effective Relief C. The District Court s Decision Should Not Be Upheld On Grounds The Court Did Not Consider i. The Caddo Nation Adequately Pleaded Claims Under The APA. 7 ii. The Wichita Tribe Waived Sovereign Immunity iii. The Delaware Nation Is Not An Indispensable Party... 9 iv. HUD Is Not An Indispensable Party v. The Caddo Nation s Suit Is Not An Impermissible Collateral Attack IV. CONCLUSION CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF DIGITAL SUBMISSION AND PRIVACY REDACTIONS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ii
4 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 4 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Airport Neighbors All., Inc., v. United States, 90 F.3d 426 (10th Cir. 1996)... 3, 4, 6, 7 Caddo Nation of Okla. v. Wichita & Affiliated Tribes, No. CIV HE, 2018 WL (W.D. Okla. July 9, 2018)...8, 9 Caddo Nation of Okla. v. Wichita & Affiliated Tribes, 877 F.3d 1171 (10th Cir. 2017)... 4 Catron Cty. Bd. of Comm rs, N.M. v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996)... 8 Davis v. Mineta, 302 F.3d 1104 (10th Cir. 2002)... 3 Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm n v. CollegeAmerica Denver, Inc., 869 F.3d 1171 (10th Cir. 2017)... 2 Heeren v. City of Jamestown, Ky., 817 F. Supp (W.D. Ky. 1992), aff d, 39 F.3d 628 (6th Cir. 1994) Medina v. City & Cty. of Denver, 960 F.2d 1493 (10th Cir. 1992)... 7 Soc y Hill Towers Owners Ass n v. Rendell, 20 F. Supp. 2d 855 (E.D. Pa. 1998), aff d, 210 F.3d 168 (3d Cir. 2000) Tal v. Hogan, 453 F.3d 1244 (10th Cir.2006)... 5 Wichita & Affiliated Tribes of Okla. v. Hodel, 788 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1986)... 9 Statutes Administrative Procedure Act ( APA ) 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq.... 4, 7, 8 Federally Recognized Indian Tribes List Act of Stat et seq... 3 National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA ) 42 U.S.C et seq.... 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 National Historic Preservation Act ("NHPA") 54 U.S.C et seq.... 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 iii
5 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 5 54 U.S.C (formerly 16 U.S.C. 470f)... 1, 6, 7, 11 Regulations 24 C.F.R (a) C.F.R , C.F.R. 58.2(7)(ii) C.F.R (b) C.F.R C.F.R (c)(2)(ii)(A) C.F.R (y) C.F.R Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, 81 Fed. Reg iv
6 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 6 I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND In the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes ( Wichita Tribe ) opposition brief, the Wichita Tribe makes much of the Caddo Nation s lack of ancestral ties to the lands held in trust jointly for the Wichita Tribe, Caddo Nation and Delaware Nation ( WCD lands ). The fact that Caddo Nation was forcibly removed from its own ancestral lands and relocated to the WCD lands, however, in no way detracts from the Nation s rights under federal law to engage in consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act ( NHPA ) Indeed, the recent development in the BIA Regional Director s October 5, 2018 decision (see Caddo Nation Motion to Take Judicial Notice and Supplement the Record, ECF No (Dec. 3, 2018)), makes clear that the Federal Government continues to hold these lands in trust for all three Tribes. Moreover, even if the land was somehow partitioned in accordance with federal law, the Wichita Tribe would still be obligated under 106 to engage in good faith consultation with the Caddo Nation concerning the Caddo burials and cultural patrimony at the site of the original Riverside Indian Boarding School. The Caddo Nation further refers this Court to the Nation s discussion of the relevant facts as laid out in the Nation s opening brief, see Aplt. Br. 2, in 1 Section 106 is codified at 54 U.S.C (formerly 16 U.S.C. 470f). 1
7 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 7 particular, the fact that the Caddo Nation requested consultation within one month of having been informed by the Wichita Tribe that the site for planned construction was eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. See Aplt. App , Finally, as the Nation makes clear in its opening brief, the Caddo Nation s Amended Complaint did not merely request that the District Court tear down the building. Instead, the Nation s Amended Complaint requested that the Wichita Tribe be ordered to engage in good faith consultation with the Caddo Nation regarding not just relocation, but also ongoing activities and operations at the History Center, to ensure that going forward, Caddo burials and cultural patrimony would not be harmed. Aplt. App For these reasons, the Caddo Nation s claims are not moot, and the District Court s decision should be reversed and remanded. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW This Court reviews de novo the District Court s conclusion that the Caddo Nation s claims are entirely moot. Equal Emp t Opportunity Comm n v. CollegeAmerica Denver, Inc., 869 F.3d 1171, 1173 (10th Cir. 2017). 2
8 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 8 III. ARGUMENT A. The Caddo Nation Is A Federally Recognized Tribe. The Caddo Nation is a federally recognized Tribe included on the BIA s list of Indian Tribes, 2 the United States has taken no action to terminate the Caddo Nation s sovereign status as an Indian Tribe. The Wichita Tribe s attempt to cast dispersions on the Nation s sovereign status are both baseless and wrong. B. The Caddo Nation s Claims Are Not Moot. i. The Caddo Nation s Claims Are Not Moot Under Airport Neighbors. The Wichita Tribe attempts to argue that the National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA ), 42 U.S.C et seq., does not apply to the Caddo Nation s claims to protect cultural patrimony and Caddo burials because NEPA only entertains claims related exclusively to environmental harm. See Aplee. Br NEPA, however, is about process, and thus harm... may be presumed when an agency fails to comply with the required NEPA procedure. Davis v. Mineta, 302 F.3d 1104, 1115 (10th Cir. 2002). Here, the Wichita Tribe s failure to follow the proper procedures in completing an EA (i.e., the Tribe s failure to consider alternatives), gives rise to the Caddo Nation s claims under NEPA. 2 Federally Recognized Indian Tribes List Act of 1994, 108 Stat et seq.; see also Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, 81 Fed. Reg (including Caddo Nation of Oklahoma ). 3
9 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 9 The Wichita Tribe further attempts to cast Airport Neighbors All., Inc., v. United States as a decision wherein this Court held that it is clear that claims related to construction are moot once construction is complete. Aplee. Br. 28 (citing Airport Neighbors All., Inc., v. United States, 90 F.3d 426, 429 (10th Cir. 1996)). The Caddo Nation s Amended Complaint does not seek to halt construction on the History Center, but rather, the Amended Complaint seeks a remedy for the Wichita Tribe s ongoing violations of both NEPA, 42 U.S.C et seq., and NHPA, 54 U.S.C et seq., specifically the Tribe s operation of the History Center and continued refusal to engage in good faith consultation regarding plans for additional construction, claims that sit well within this Court s prescription on remand. 3 See Caddo Nation of Okla. v. Wichita & Affiliated Tribes, 877 F.3d 1171, 1178 (10th Cir. 2017) (The Caddo Nation may have new claims for relief it can seek in district court regarding the operation of the Center or other activities on the site. ) (emphasis added). 3 The Caddo Nation s Amended Complaint does not seek relief related to halting the History Center s Construction. See Aplt. App ( Plaintiff further seeks a declaratory judgment that Defendants have violated the APA, NHPA, and NEPA by failing to consult with the Caddo Nation. ); Aplt. App (requesting that [t]he Defendants, their agents and employees, be enjoined during the pendency of this action and permanently from any further construction and development on the twenty acre tract.... ); Aplt. App (requesting [t]he Defendants, their agents and employees, be ordered to initiate and conduct good faith consultations with the Plaintiff.... ); Aplt. App (requesting injunctive relief to halt operations at the History Center). 4
10 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 10 Finally, the Wichita Tribe contorts the record in this case to assert that the Caddo Nation s claims are moot because they are the result of Caddo s own failure to respond to the Wichita Tribe s requests for consultation.... Aplee. Br. 29. However, as the Caddo Nation s Amended Complaint alleges, within one month of having been informed for the first time of the Wichita Tribe s findings of historical significance at the Riverside Indian Boarding School as well as the Tribe s intentions to build there the Caddo Nation voiced its opposition. See Aplt. App , To the extent that the Wichita Tribe disputes these factual allegations, such disputes are not to be resolved in the Wichita Tribe s favor on a motion to dismiss. See Tal v. Hogan, 453 F.3d 1244, 1252 (10th Cir.2006) (appellate court accepts all well-pleaded facts alleged in the complaint as true, and draws all reasonable inferences from those facts in favor of the plaintiff). ii. Future Development Is Not Speculative Because The Wichita Tribe Stated It Would Undertake This Development In The EA. The Wichita Tribe cannot fault the Caddo Nation for relying on statements made by the Tribe and/or the Tribe s own archaeologist. John D. Northcutt, who the Wichita Tribe hired to conduct the studies required under the EA, described the Tribe s plans as including the construction of office space, restaurant, hotel, casino, museum, dance grounds, grass hut exhibit, outdoor concert and amphitheater, and parking areas. Aplt. App Furthermore, in the Tribe s 5
11 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 11 own EA, the Wichita Tribe stated that [t]he Tribe intends to continue its efforts to develop the site. Aplt. App Relying on the Wichita Tribe s own description of its intended plans to continue construction does not constitute speculation. The Wichita Tribe now avers that the Caddo Nation s claims must be moot because no solicitations for consultation, no construction-related activity, and no other activity that might signify that a new project is underway. Aplee. Br. 32. No law or authority, however, requires the Caddo Nation to wait until the Wichita Tribe has literally broken ground on the Tribe s next phase of construction. The Wichita Tribe announced its plans for further construction in its EA, and the EA constitutes sufficient grounds, under NEPA, to bring suit. iii. Ordering Consultation Would Constitute Effective Relief. Requiring the Wichita Tribe to engage in good faith consultation would constitute effective relief. The Wichita Tribe baldly asserts that this is no remedy at all. Aplee. Br. 33. Quite the opposite, this is precisely the remedy that the NHPA contemplates. The implementing regulations make clear that the goal of 106 is to provide Tribes with a reasonable opportunity to identify its concerns about historic properties, [and] advise on the identification and evaluation of historic properties. 36 C.F.R (c)(2)(ii)(A). Like the defendants in Airport Neighbors, if the District Court finds that the Wichita Tribe violated NEPA or NHPA, the Court could order that the History Center be closed or impose 6
12 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 12 restrictions on its operations until the Tribe complies with NEPA and consults with the Caddo Nation under NHPA. See 90 F.3d at 429. C. The District Court s Decision Should Not Be Upheld On Grounds The Court Did Not Consider. The Wichita Tribe asks this Court to uphold the District Court s decision on numerous grounds which the District Court did not consider (i.e., pleading under the Administrative Procedure Act ( APA ), 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq., indispensable parties, impermissible collateral attack, etc.). See Aplee. Br ; id. at 52 (quoting Medina v. City & Cty. of Denver, 960 F.2d 1493, 1495 n.1 (10th Cir. 1992)). For the reasons described below, none of the peripheral issues the Wichita Tribe raises on appeal justify affirming the District Court s decision on grounds the District Court did not consider. i. The Caddo Nation Adequately Pleaded Claims Under The APA. The Wichita Tribe asserts that neither of these statutes [NEPA and NHPA] afford Caddo a private right of action. Aplee. Br. 36. This, of course, is beside the point since the Caddo Nation s Amended Complaint plainly and clearly pleads the Nation s NEPA and NHPA claims through the APA and not as a private right of action. As to the sufficiency of the Caddo Nation s pleading, the Amended Complaint more than satisfies this Court s own standard, as this Court has held that 7
13 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 13 a plaintiff seeking judicial review pursuant to the APA must (i) identify some final agency action and (ii) demonstrate that its claims fall within the zone of interests protected by the statute forming the basis of its claims. Catron Cty. Bd. of Comm rs, N.M. v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 75 F.3d 1429, 1434 (10th Cir. 1996) (quotation omitted). The Wichita Tribe has previously acknowledged that the Nation satisfied the first requirement, see generally Aplt. App. 0294; and as to the second, the entirety of the Caddo Nation s Amended Complaint sufficiently demonstrates that the Nation s claims fall within the zone of interests protected by NHPA and NEPA. The Caddo Nation, therefore, adequately pleaded its claims under the APA. 4 ii. The Wichita Tribe Waived Sovereign Immunity. As the District Court correctly concluded, the Wichita Tribe willfully waived its sovereignty immunity when the Tribe accepted the release of funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development ( HUD ) for the History Center projects and assumed the responsibilities of the federal agency as the Responsible Entity under 24 C.F.R See Caddo Nation of Okla. v. Wichita 4 The Amended Complaint is replete with allegations that allege the Wichita Tribe s actions were arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with the law. See, eg., Aplt. App , 0262, 0266, 0272, , ,
14 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 14 and Affiliated Tribes, No. CIV HE, 2018 WL , at *1-2 (W.D. Okla. July 9, 2018); Aplt. App President Parton signed the Wichita Tribe s EA, stating that: The Wichita and Affiliated Tribes certifies to HUD that Terri Parton, in her capacity as President consents to accept the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts if an action is brought to enforce responsibilities in relation to the environmental review process and that these responsibilities have been satisfied. Aplt. App The Wichita Tribe fails to cite to any authority to support the proposition that once a Tribe assumes a federal agency s duties and responsibilities under NEPA, it can later retract its waiver of immunity. There are none. By signing the EA, the Wichita Tribe consented to suits challenging the legality of the Tribe s EA. iii. The Delaware Nation Is Not An Indispensable Party To assert that this case cannot proceed without the Delaware Nation, the Wichita Tribe erroneously conflates land ownership with the Caddo Nation s rights under NEPA and NHPA and relies on an inapplicable holding in Wichita & Affiliated Tribes of Okla. v. Hodel, 788 F.2d 765, 774 (D.C. Cir. 1986). See Aplee. Br. 44. However, in contrast to the holding in Hodel, which dealt with distribution of income derived from the jointly owned lands, the Caddo Nation s claims relate to Caddo Nation s unique right to protect Caddo remains and cultural patrimony under NHPA and NEPA. The fact that the lands are owned by three Tribes does 9
15 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 15 not alter this Court s analysis under either NEPA or NHPA, as the duties under these two statutes are not tethered to specific land ownership, but rather, are predicated on the occurrence of a major federal action (NEPA), 40 C.F.R , or federal undertaking (NHPA), 36 C.F.R (y). Accordingly, the Delaware Nation is not indispensable to the litigation. iv. HUD Is Not An Indispensable Party. HUD is not an indispensable party, and the Wichita Tribe has not cited a single precedent or authority concluding that HUD is answerable to a lawsuit when a Responsible Entity has assumed HUD s duties under federal law. There are none. Instead, once HUD has delegated its authority to a Responsible Entity, HUD completely detaches itself from disputes focusing on the [local government s] compliance with NEPA, warning in its regulations that [p]ersons and agencies seeking redress in relation to environmental reviews... shall deal with the recipient and not with HUD. Heeren v. City of Jamestown, Ky., 817 F. Supp. 1374, 1376 (W.D. Ky. 1992), aff d, 39 F.3d 628 (6th Cir. 1994) (quoting 24 C.F.R (b)) (emphasis added). Indeed, the [Responsible Entity], rather than HUD, is responsible for performing the proper substantive historic review. Soc y Hill Towers Owners Ass n v. Rendell, 20 F. Supp. 2d 855, 872 (E.D. Pa. 1998), aff d, 210 F.3d 168 (3d Cir. 2000). 10
16 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 16 Finally, the Wichita Tribe erroneously asserts that Congress did not intend to transfer such duties to, and waive the sovereign immunity of, an Indian Tribe because Indian tribes are not included in the definition of local government found within 36 C.F.R Aplee. Br. 42. The exclusion of Tribes from this definition of local government is irrelevant, however, because the Tribe s assumption of HUD s duties and concomitant waiver of sovereign immunity stems from the Tribe s assuming the role of Responsible Entity under 24 C.F.R (a), not 36 C.F.R Notably, 58.2(7)(ii) includes Indian Tribe within the definition of Responsible Entity. v. The Caddo Nation s Suit Is Not An Impermissible Collateral Attack. The Caddo Nation has not asked this Court, or the District Court, to make any rulings on the ownership status of the WCD lands or on the agency decisions currently pending on appeal before the IBIA. The actual status of the contested lands is only relevant in the current litigation in so far as it refutes the Wichita Tribe s defense that the Tribe s alleged exclusive authority over this parcel of WCD lands alleviates the Tribe of its duty to engage in 106 consultation with the Caddo Nation. 11
17 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 17 IV. CONCLUSION Respectfully submitted this 4th day of December, s/mary Kathryn Nagle Mary Kathryn Nagle, NYB No Wilson Pipestem, OBA No Abi Fain, OBA No Pipestem Law, P.C. 320 S. Boston Ave., Suite 1705 Tulsa, OK (Office) Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant Caddo Nation of Oklahoma 12
18 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 18 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE This brief complies with the type-volume limitation of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7) because, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(f) and 10th Cir. Local Rule 32(b), the brief contains 2,572 words. I relied upon my word processor to obtain the count and it is Microsoft Word This brief complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5) and the type style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6) because this brief has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Office Word 2013 in Times New Roman, 14 point font. Date: December 4, 2018 s/mary Kathryn Nagle Mary Kathryn Nagle 13
19 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 19 CERTIFICATE OF DIGITAL SUBMISSION AND PRIVACY REDACTIONS I certify that: (1) all required privacy redactions have been made in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 25(a)(5) and 10th Cir. Rule 25.5; (2) every document submitted in digital form or scanned PDF format is an exact copy of the hard copy filed with the Clerk when called for; and (3) the digital submissions have been scanned for viruses with the most recent version of a commercial virus scanning program, Norton Security v. 6.4, last updated December 4, 2018, and according to the program, are free from viruses. Dated this 4th day of December, s/mary Kathryn Nagle Mary Kathryn Nagle 14
20 Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 12/04/2018 Page: 20 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mary Kathryn Nagle, hereby certify that on this 4th day of December, 2018, I electronically transmitted the foregoing document to the Clerk of Court using the ECF system. Based on electronic records currently on file, the Clerk of Court will transmit a Notice of Docket Activity to the following ECF registrants: William R. Norman, OBA No K. Kirke Kickingbird, OBA No Michael D. McMahan, OBA No Randi Dawn Gardner Hardin, OBA No Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, LLP 101 Park Ave., Suite 700 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Telephone: Fax: WNorman@hobbsstraus.com KKickingbird@hobbsstraus.com MMcMahan@hobbsstraus.com RHardin@hobbsstraus.com Attorneys for Defendant-Appellees Wichita and Affiliated Tribes s/mary Kathryn Nagle Mary Kathryn Nagle 15
NO IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA. Plaintiff-Appellant,
Appellate Case: 16-6161 Document: 01019634608 Date Filed: 06/08/2016 Page: 1 NO. 16-6161 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WICHITA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:16-cv-00559-HE Document 66 Filed 04/25/18 Page 1 of 34 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CADDO NATION of OKLAHOMA ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. CIV-16-559-HE
More informationNo In the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit RICHARD DOUGLAS HACKFORD, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Appellate Case: 15-4120 Document: 01019548299 Date Filed: 01/04/2016 Page: 1 No. 15-4120 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit RICHARD DOUGLAS HACKFORD, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, STATE
More informationCase 5:16-cv W Document 1-5 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 1
Case 5:16-cv-00559-W Document 1-5 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 1 Case 5:16-cv-00559-W Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CADDO NATION
More informationNo In The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Appellate Case: 15-6117 Document: 01019504579 Date Filed: 10/08/2015 Page: 1 No. 15-6117 In The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit UNITED PLANNERS FINANCIAL SERVICES OF AMERICA, LP, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.
Appellate Case: 16-4154 Document: 01019730944 Date Filed: 12/05/2016 Page: 1 No. 16-4154 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation,
More informationNo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, CHARLES D.
Appellate Case: 17-4059 Document: 01019889341 01019889684 Date Filed: 10/23/2017 Page: 1 No. 17-4059 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee,
More informationMARTHA L. KING 1900 Plaza Drive Louisville, CO Telephone: (303) Direct: (303) Fax: (303)
Appellate Case: 13-6117 Document: 01019133581 Date Filed: 09/27/2013 Page: 1 MARTHA L. KING 1900 Plaza Drive Louisville, CO 80027 Telephone: (303) 673-9600 Direct: (303) 815-1712 Fax: (303) 673-9155 E-Mail:
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.
Appellate Case: 18-4013 Document: 010110021345 Date Filed: 07/11/2018 Page: 1 No. 18-4013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation,
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
No. 17-6064 IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit MARCUS D. WOODSON Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRACY MCCOLLUM, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. On Appeal from
More informationNos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 16-8068 Document: 01019780139 Date Filed: 03/15/2017 Page: 1 Nos. 16-8068, 16-8069 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF WYOMING; STATE OF COLORADO; INDEPENDENT
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 12-5136 Document: 01019118132 Date Filed: 08/30/2013 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) ) Appellee/Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 12-5134 &
More informationcv IN THE. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. ELIZABETH A. TREMBLAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Case 14-2031, Document 43, 11/03/2014, 1361074, Page 1 of 21 14-2031-cv To Be Argued By: PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. IN THE United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ELIZABETH A. TREMBLAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationPUBLISH TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellees, No
PUBLISH FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit September 19, 2007 Elisabeth A. Shumaker UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT MINER ELECTRIC, INC.; RUSSELL E. MINER, v.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
CHRISTINE WARREN, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 18, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellant, v.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before TYMKOVICH, HOLLOWAY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit MASCARENAS ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT August 14, 2012 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 5:11-cv-01078-D Document 16 Filed 11/04/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA APACHE TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA, vs. Plaintiff, TGS ANADARKO LLC; and WELLS
More informationNos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 12-5134 Document: 01018990262 Date Filed: 01/25/2013 Page: 1 Nos. 12-5134 & 12-5136 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT State of Oklahoma, Appellee/Plaintiff, v.
More informationCase 1:11-cv RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:11-cv-00946-RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No (1:15-cv GBL-MSN)
Appeal: 16-1110 Doc: 20-1 Filed: 01/30/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 Total Pages:(1 of 52) FILED: January 30, 2017 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1110 (1:15-cv-00675-GBL-MSN) NATIONAL COUNCIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEW MEXICO; THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ALBUQUERQUE/BERNALILLO COUNTY, INC.; SAGE COUNCILL NEW MEXICO
More informationFEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES
1162 193 FEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES Cashland to fully present its defense and argue its theory of the case to the jury, the judgment must be reversed. The judgment of the United States District Court
More informationCase 2:17-cv SVW-AFM Document 39 Filed 12/04/17 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:653
Case :-cv-0-svw-afm Document Filed /0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 JEFFREY H. WOOD Acting Assistant Attorney General REBECCA M. ROSS, Trial Attorney (AZ Bar No. 00) rebecca.ross@usdoj.gov DEDRA S. CURTEMAN,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:17-cv-00887-HE Document 26 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA COMANCHE NATION ) OF OKLAHOMA ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-17-887-HE
More informationMEMORANDUM OF POINTS AN AUTHORITIES
Case :-cv-000-ckj Document 0 Filed 0// Page of 0 0 0 ELIZABETH A. STRANGE First Assistant United States Attorney District of Arizona J. COLE HERNANDEZ Assistant U.S. Attorney Arizona State Bar No. 00 e-mail:
More informationCase No. CIV HE Judge Joe Heaton, United States District Judge, Presiding
Case 5:14-cv-01278-HE Document 13 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 22 Case No. CIV-14-1278-HE Judge Joe Heaton, United States District Judge, Presiding IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT
More informationCase 4:15-cv JSW Document 76 Filed 09/28/16 Page 1 of 12
Case :-cv-0-jsw Document Filed 0// Page of 0 JOHN C. CRUDEN Assistant Attorney General Environment & Natural Resources Division United States Department of Justice DAVID B. GLAZER (D.C. 00) Natural Resources
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) KAREN HARRIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 11-CV-654-GKF-FHM ) (2) MUSCOGEE (CREEK) NATION d/b/a ) RIVER SPIRIT CASINO,
More informationAppeal No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE, TULALIP TRIBES, et al.,
Case: 18-35441, 10/24/2018, ID: 11059304, DktEntry: 20, Page 1 of 20 Appeal No. 18-35441 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TULALIP TRIBES,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 13-9590 Document: 01019139697 Date Filed: 10/09/2013 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ACCIPITER COMMUNICATIONS INC., Petitioner v. No. 13-9590 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
More informationREPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANTS
Case: 15-36003, 09/19/2016, ID: 10127799, DktEntry: 26, Page 1 of 14 Docket No. 15-36003 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit GLENN EAGLEMAN, et al. Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ROCKY
More informationAppellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 02/10/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 15-8126 Document: 01019569175 Date Filed: 02/10/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF WYOMING, et al; Petitioners - Appellees, and STATE OR NORTH DAKOTA,
More informationCase No , & (consolidated) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Case: 13-4330 Document: 003111516193 Page: 5 Date Filed: 01/24/2014 Case No. 13-4330, 13-4394 & 13-4501 (consolidated) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT PPL ENERGYPLUS, LLC, et
More informationIn The United States Court of Appeals For the Third Circuit
Case: 18-3170 Document: 003113048345 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/01/2018 No. 18-3170 In The United States Court of Appeals For the Third Circuit ASSOCIATION OF NEW JERSEY RIFLE & PISTOL CLUBS, INC., BLAKE ELLMAN,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:10-cv-01936-M Document 24 Filed 07/20/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID 177 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING, INC., v. Plaintiff,
More informationFEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES
898 674 FEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES held that the securities-law claim advanced several years later does not relate back to the original complaint. Anderson did not contest that decision in his initial
More informationNO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA. Plaintiff-Appellant, WICHITA AND AFFILIATED TRIBES, et al.
Appellate Case: 16-6161 Document: 01019819590 Date Filed: 06/02/2017 Page: 1 NO. 16-6161 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WICHITA AND
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
USCA Case #19-5042 Document #1779028 Filed: 03/24/2019 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT : DAMIEN GUEDUES, et al., : : No. 19-5042 Appellants : : Consolidated
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 19, 2009 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ELMORE SHERIFF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ACCELERATED
More informationNo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 17-2147 Document: 01019980287 Date Filed: 04/23/2018 Page: 1 No. 17-2147 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ex rel. State Engineer, Plaintiff-Appellees,
More informationNo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. VALERIE SOTO, as Guardian Ad Litem of Y.D., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Case: 17-16705, 11/22/2017, ID: 10665607, DktEntry: 15, Page 1 of 20 No. 17-16705 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VALERIE SOTO, as Guardian Ad Litem of Y.D., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationIn the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Case: 17-3752 Document: 003113097118 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/28/2018 No. 17-3752 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DONALD J.
More informationCase 5:07-cv C Document 27 Filed 12/19/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:07-cv-00514-C Document 27 Filed 12/19/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA VELIE and VELIE, P.L.L.C., JONATHAN VELIE Plaintiff, vs. Case No.
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 11-2141 Document: 01018813154 Date Filed: 03/19/2012 Page: 1 No. 11-2141 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED
More informationSTATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit November 9, 2010 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT BELVA ANN NAHNO-LOPEZ; BERDENE NAHNO-LOPEZ;
More informationCase 5:12-cv C Document 15 Filed 01/07/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:12-cv-01024-C Document 15 Filed 01/07/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA JENNIFER ROSSER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No.: CIV-2012-1024-C
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Proceeding pro se, A. V. Avington, Jr. filed discrimination and retaliation
A. V. AVINGTON, JR., FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit Plaintiff - Appellant, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT February 11, 2015 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:11-cv-00782-JHP -PJC Document 22 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 03/15/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA EDDIE SANTANA ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 11-CV-782-JHP-PJC
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
JERRY McCORMICK, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT June 4, 2013 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v. THE CITY
More information6:14-cv KEW Document 26 Filed in ED/OK on 06/17/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
6:14-cv-00182-KEW Document 26 Filed in ED/OK on 06/17/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) CHOCTAW NATION OF ) OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ORDER
Case 5:17-cv-00887-HE Document 33 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA COMANCHE NATION OF OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) NO. CIV-17-887-HE
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. NARRAGANSETT INDIAN TRIBE, Plaintiff-Appellant
Case: 17-1951 Document: 00117256402 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/15/2018 Entry ID: 6151158 No. 17-1951 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT NARRAGANSETT INDIAN TRIBE, Plaintiff-Appellant
More informationAppellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 02/08/2011 Page: 1 CASE NO
Appellate Case: 10-6239 Document: 01018582344 Date Filed: 02/08/2011 Page: 1 CASE NO. 10-6239 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CHRISTOPHER YANCEY, Appellant, v. TIMOTHY THOMAS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:07-cv-00642-CVE-PJC Document 46 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA WAGONER COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT NO. 2, an agency of the
More informationNo IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. HO-CHUNK, INC. et al., Appellant,
USCA Case #17-5140 Document #1711535 Filed: 01/04/2018 Page 1 of 17 No. 17-5140 IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit HO-CHUNK, INC. et al., Appellant, v. JEFF SESSIONS
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2217 County of Charles Mix, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * District of South Dakota. * United
More informationORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED Nos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STUART T. GUTTMAN, M.D.
Appellate Case: 10-2167 Document: 01018564699 Date Filed: 01/10/2011 Page: 1 ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED Nos. 10-2167 & 10-2172 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STUART T. GUTTMAN,
More informationCase 1:19-cv WES-PAS Document 1-1 Filed 03/29/19 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 11
Case 1:19-cv-00158-WES-PAS Document 1-1 Filed 03/29/19 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 11 Case 1:19-cv-00158-WES-PAS Document 1 Filed 03/29/19 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 NARRAGANSETT INDIAN TRIBE, ACTING BY AND THROUGH
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case:-cv-0-MEJ Document Filed0// Page of 0 CITY OF OAKLAND, v. Northern District of California Plaintiff, ERIC HOLDER, Attorney General of the United States; MELINDA HAAG, U.S. Attorney for the Northern
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UTE INDIAN TRIBE, MYTON,
Appellate Case: 15-4080 Document: 01019509860 01019511871 Date Filed: 10/19/2015 10/22/2015 Page: 1 No. 15-4080 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UTE INDIAN TRIBE, v. Plaintiff-Appellant
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA NORTHERN ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER, et al., v. Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-00030-SLG
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case: 18-15068, 04/10/2018, ID: 10831190, DktEntry: 137-2, Page 1 of 15 Nos. 18-15068, 18-15069, 18-15070, 18-15071, 18-15072, 18-15128, 18-15133, 18-15134 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
GEORGE HALL, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 15, 2013 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JEFF HUPP;
More informationCase 5:07-cv HE Document 20 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:07-cv-00118-HE Document 20 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA TERRY MURPHY d/b/a ENVIRONMENTAL ) PRODUCTS, and ROGER LACKEY, )
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:11-cv-00675-CVE-TLW Document 16 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 03/12/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA EASTERN SHAWNEE TRIBE OF ) OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff,
More informationNO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA. Plaintiff-Appellant. WICHITA AND AFFILIATED TRIBES, et al.
Appellate Case: 18-6142 Document: 010110085655 Date Filed: 11/16/2018 Page: 1 NO. 18-6142 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT CADDO NATION OF OKLAHOMA Plaintiff-Appellant v. WICHITA AND
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT ) INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE ) PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs-Appellees, ) ) v. ) No. 17-1351 ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants-Appellants.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:17CV240
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:17CV240 JOSEPH CLARK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) MEMORANDUM AND ) RECOMMENDATION HARRAH S NC CASINO COMPANY,
More informationCase 2:13-cv KJM-KJN Document 30 Filed 05/09/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10
Case :-cv-00-kjm-kjn Document 0 Filed 0/0/ Page of KENNETH R. WILLIAMS, State Bar No. 0 Attorney at Law 0 th Street, th Floor Sacramento, CA Telephone: () - Attorney for Plaintiffs Jamul Action Committee,
More informationCase 1:13-cv FDS Document 57 Filed 08/27/14 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:13-cv-13286-FDS Document 57 Filed 08/27/14 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSSETTS, and Plaintiff, AQUINNAH/GAY HEAD COMMUNITY
More informationCase 6:11-cv CJS Document 76 Filed 12/11/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Defendant.
Case 6:11-cv-06004-CJS Document 76 Filed 12/11/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CAYUGA INDIAN NATION OF NEW YORK, -v- SENECA COUNTY, NEW YORK, Plaintiff, Defendant.
More informationCase 1:18-cv CKK Document 16 Filed 01/07/19 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:18-cv-00891-CKK Document 16 Filed 01/07/19 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JULIA CAVAZOS, et al., Plaintiffs v. RYAN ZINKE, et al., Defendants Civil Action
More informationMOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Case 5:16-cv-01045-F Document 4 Filed 09/09/16 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA JOHN DAUGOMAH, an adult Member ) of the Kiowa Indian Tribe, ) Case No.: 16-cv-1045-D
More informationCase 1:16-cv LRS Document 14 Filed 09/01/16
0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON KLICKITAT COUNTY, a ) political subdivision of the State of ) No. :-CV-000-LRS Washington, ) ) Plaintiff, ) MOTION TO DISMISS ) ) vs. ) )
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, HOLMES and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.
TWILLADEAN CINK, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit November 27, 2015 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellant, v.
More informationCase 3:16-cv LRH-WGC Document 125 Filed 03/28/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * *
Case :-cv-00-lrh-wgc Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * 0 0 BATTLE MOUNTAIN BAND of the TE- MOAK TRIBE OF WESTERN SHOSHONE INDIANS, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES
More informationCase No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT. ULTRAMERCIAL, LLC and ULTRAMERCIAL, INC., and WILDTANGENT, INC.
Case No. 2010-1544 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT ULTRAMERCIAL, LLC and ULTRAMERCIAL, INC., v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, HULU, LLC, Defendant, and WILDTANGENT, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
More informationCase 0:10-cv WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:10-cv-61985-WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GARDEN-AIRE VILLAGE SOUTH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC., a Florida
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 11, 2009 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court MEREDITH KORNFELD; NANCY KORNFELD a/k/a Nan
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ELTON LOUIS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 08-C-558 STOCKBRIDGE-MUNSEE COMMUNITY, Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Elton Louis filed this action
More informationCase 2:17-cv JLR Document 179 Filed 04/07/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON.
Case :-cv-00-jlr Document Filed 0/0/ Page of The Honorable James L. Robart UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., v. Plaintiffs, DONALD TRUMP, in his
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:14-cv-00594-CG-M Document 11 Filed 02/20/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION CHRISTINE WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:08-cv-00698-HE Document 84 Filed 07/31/12 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA 1. NEW GAMING SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. No. 08-CV-00698-HE 1. NATIONAL
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-3452 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, Respondent-Appellant. Appeal From
More informationCase No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MICHELLE FLANAGAN, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
Case: 18-55717, 11/20/2018, ID: 11095057, DktEntry: 27, Page 1 of 21 Case No. 18-55717 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MICHELLE FLANAGAN, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. XAVIER
More informationORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. No MARILYN VANN, et al.
USCA Case #11-5322 Document #1384714 Filed: 07/19/2012 Page 1 of 41 ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 11-5322 MARILYN VANN,
More informationNos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 18-8029 Document: 01019987899 Date Filed: 05/07/2018 Page: 1 Nos. 18-8027, 18-8029 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF WYOMING, et al., Petitioners-Appellees,
More informationCase MFW Doc 151 Filed 12/05/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 14-50435-MFW Doc 151 Filed 12/05/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: WASHINGTON MUTUAL INC., et al., Debtors Chapter 11 Case No. 08-12229 (MFW)
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:06-cv-00591-F Document 21 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ERIC ALLEN PATTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. CIV-06-0591-F
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED OCT 03 2016 STEVEN O. PETERSEN, on behalf of L.P., a minor and beneficiary and as Personal Representative of the estate of
More informationCase 5:15-cv L Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:15-cv-00241-L Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1 JOHN R. SHOTTON, an individual, v. Plaintiff, (2 HOWARD F. PITKIN, in his individual
More informationcv. United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
09-0905-cv United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ARISTA RECORDS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, BMG MUSIC, a New York
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
DUSTIN ROBERT EASTOM, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 25, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v.
More informationCase 1:16-cv DLH-CSM Document 91 Filed 11/02/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Case 1:16-cv-00103-DLH-CSM Document 91 Filed 11/02/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA Enerplus Resources (USA Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff,
More informationCase: Document: Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Filed: September 04, 2012
Case: 12-4055 Document: 006111420965 Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 1 Deborah S. Hunt Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 100 EAST FIFTH STREET, ROOM 540 POTTER STEWART U.S. COURTHOUSE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:08-cv-02117-P Document 71 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 11 PageID 954 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY; BOYD L. RICHIE, in his capacity
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS. August Term, (Argued: October 28, 2015 Decided: June 26, 2017) Docket No Plaintiff Appellant,
14 3709 Crupar Weinmann v. Paris Baguette America, Inc. 14 3709 Crupar Weinmann v. Paris Baguette America, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2015 (Argued: October
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv DLG.
Case: 14-11084 Date Filed: 12/19/2014 Page: 1 of 16 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 14-11084 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-22737-DLG AARON CAMACHO
More informationNATURE OF THE ACTION. enforcement of the Arbitration Award entered November 24, 2015 styled In the
Case 5:15-cv-01379-R Document 1 Filed 12/23/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA IOWA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA, Plaintiff, vs. STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Defendant.
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.
Appeal: 18-1684 Doc: 33 Filed: 08/24/2018 Pg: 1 of 25 No. 18-1684 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
More information