DID WE 44 Sego-Ghi deny CEertkelatr AS
emtimels ) whew vuder malbex rule is
, timely hifed ?

J3 s7 THE sone/76e JATTY. CEVERALS

DpeTy ge PRESS 7HS CAUSE OF ACTION

TO PROTEET V5. ATIZEWS VESTED 4£/BERTT

INTEREST SLO3sTANTIE Nights niles e+

i op

aud fame tSIES at oF e

HAS THE TRUE PROPER PERSon) ARP.

RESPONPEWMYT GONCE LED the case by

He tal Jeffer. oF the law Fa lure

+o pesper, fo thie FIRST STEP as

Ts WE La. Qrst. (974 Megat as repugesart

Jo THE VS. Grs7-s MoT KAW HS BEE A

te DATE APGROVE? BY Cow FRETS OR WE

La. Cons f- 7426 7

43 PAW RELATAR > substatie and

Relb/ou% ro bts eo £6L0 SPOKE UEARETES

PhaoteetEbD feet THE US -CosT- ART Te
ape

Scot LET and Amen hmeAs Kank XV.

I

HAS RESPONDENTS WorsaTED pelptors
opt oof gh? oF estoy oC relafed

to fhe MASTER. -ToBAGO- CLASS -— ACTIAW —
seve wet by n@roach.rg ugar Ais
rel 5/eos substan? /ve ris Ye HL
SAKE TALK" {1 geflebrakonw' of he
first ew! versa ls recag yi zed HOLY
SA pCE ComPieniios freer of refi bo
Kypess/ IAS Mous ards of years old .©
DOES HWE US. QWS7 SUPPORT /Cbi/DOV2.
Bd STATES Aental of- fAEE Fel "or4
20KE TALK BEA." Gomtte nO 2
Resgmdats have pevere. to hate produced
[rite ang rétords Avg rithows fe Sygert
ther aflaatey Yhar Ko devial of
relaters rg4t fe sale ss py
hs seter.éee ach DOL poh Ez cate
de fet ble AE be, seruitrda ; does the tut
Redluce deny be risAt po Presem rian,
ot INN OCCQa___ protecte) 4, Aven d Hie
DeES We RESfa PEAT Aarons) sala@ on
ViOLAVTE = BLATERS UENUMERAED (2ét/T
o- Oar! soserte

we.

Caw he ha heq~ Jha, Deg of Poblie Satety
avd brrestiows retroactively ehavee

a debinik seutewce by akin, away
Ae Ct

Did the 5th Circuit deny certiorari as untimely, when under mailbox rule is timely filed?