SUNTHARALINKAM

FILED

Suntharalinkam v. Gonzales, No. 04-70258 MAY 18 2007

CATHY A. CATTERSON, CLERK

KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge, dissenting: U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

In their joint motion to file supplemental briefing, the parties agreed to

abide by Fed. R. App. P. 32, which, among other things, limits the length of briefs

to 14,000 words. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)(i). Petitioner now seeks leave to file

an oversized brief because “[t]here are a number of issues involved in this case,”

which pretty much describes most of our cases. Petitioner offers no other reason.

The case for extra pages is particularly weak here because petitioner has

already filed a 24-page principal brief and a 9-page reply brief. Two amicus briefs

have also been filed in support of petitioner, adding another 33 pages to his side of

the argument. The government’s brief, which defends the same territory, came in

at 12,242 words.

I find it vexing that petitioner did not file his motion in time so we could

rule on it without disrupting the briefing schedule. Instead, he sent in a non-

conforming brief the day after it was due, then waited three…