No. 21-5186
Mihran Melkonyan v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-law auer-deference circuit-split deference federal-courts judicial-interpretation regulatory-interpretation sentencing sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (from Petition)
1.)
Whether, as the Courts of Appeals for the Third' and Sixth² Circuits have held, in
conflict with the decision below³ and decisions of the Fifth* and Eleventh² Circuits, this Court's
Kisorg decision proscribes the federal courts from granting "Auer' deference" to the Commentary
and Application Notes to the Sentencing Guidelines only if a regulation is genuinely ambiguous
and, even then, not when the reasons for that presumption do not apply or when countervailing
reasons outweigh them?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Auer deference applies to the Sentencing Guidelines
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-07-29
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-07-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 23, 2021)
Attorneys
Mihran Melkonyan
Mihran Melkonyan — Petitioner
United States
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent