No. 18-140
Response Waived
Tags: attorney-admission civil-procedure civil-rights district-court due-process free-speech judicial-error legal-admission mootness ninth-circuit pro-hac-vice prosecutorial-misconduct sanctions standing
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the Ninth Circuit err in failing to vacate the
erroneous denial of Mr. Larry Klayman's ("Mr. Klayman") admission pro hac vice in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Nevada despite the fact that it is now
moot, yet still causing Mr. Klayman grave and serious
injury?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in failing to vacate the erroneous denial of Mr. Larry Klayman's admission pro hac vice despite the fact that it is now moot, yet still causing Mr. Klayman grave and serious injury
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-08-03
Waiver of right of respondent UNITED STATES to respond filed.
2018-07-20
Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due August 30, 2018)
Attorneys
Cliven Bundy
Larry Elliot Klayman — Klayman Law Group, P.A., Petitioner
UNITED STATES
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent