...	racy chestnut fat ankles	07/31/14
Guessing the broader CA5 is less friendly to AA than Higginb...	cracking chartreuse gunner lay	07/31/14
...	racy chestnut fat ankles	07/31/14
If they believe CA5 is significantly more hostile to AA such...	cracking chartreuse gunner lay	07/31/14
...	racy chestnut fat ankles	07/31/14
SCOTUS isn't a court of error correction and CA5 purporting ...	razzle bearded indirect expression	07/31/14
...	racy chestnut fat ankles	07/31/14
Of course it can. But it's much less likely to grant cert th...	razzle bearded indirect expression	07/31/14
...	racy chestnut fat ankles	07/31/14
...	racy chestnut fat ankles	07/31/14
...	racy chestnut fat ankles	08/01/14

Date: July 31st, 2014 10:40 AM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034537)

Date: July 31st, 2014 10:44 AM Author: cracking chartreuse gunner lay Guessing the broader CA5 is less friendly to AA than Higginbotham and King. Churning dat bill (who is finding the litigation at this point?). Spitballing arguments for SCOTUS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034559)

Date: July 31st, 2014 10:50 AM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034598)

Date: July 31st, 2014 10:57 AM Author: cracking chartreuse gunner lay If they believe CA5 is significantly more hostile to AA such that it might grant review, obviously they want to try to win the case at the circuit in the event SCOTUS is fucking done with this case. If they don't get review, how long does that really add to their cert calendar? A few months? Seems like they'd be cutting it close to get the case in for OT2014 anyway. SCOTUS practitioners have very specific calendars about cert consideration days and superstitions about which days are best to be up for review (eg, you dont want the new batch of clerks writing your cert memo because they are overly inclined to recommend denial) so it is possible they didn't like their timing and wanted a later draw. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034632)

Date: July 31st, 2014 11:11 AM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034682)

Date: July 31st, 2014 11:00 AM Author: razzle bearded indirect expression SCOTUS isn't a court of error correction and CA5 purporting to apply the "new" standard, based on a complex record, makes the case much less cert-worthy than the first time around. Full CA5 is probably their best hope, ideally to persuade a majority that the panel misapplied the new standard. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034647)

Date: July 31st, 2014 11:20 AM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034725)

Date: July 31st, 2014 11:27 AM Author: razzle bearded indirect expression Of course it can. But it's much less likely to grant cert the second time around. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034758)

Date: July 31st, 2014 11:28 AM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26034765)

Date: July 31st, 2014 7:51 PM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26037667)

Date: August 1st, 2014 10:55 AM Author: racy chestnut fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2632808&forum_id=2#26041041)