Bryan

After the decision in this case (C. C. A.) 74 F.(2d) 379 , the appellee calls our attention, by way of petition for rehearing, to our lack of jurisdiction of appeal based upon our decision in Bryan v. Fumio Arai (C. C. A.) 64 F.(2d) 954 , holding that the time fixed by rule of the District Court in Hawaii controlled the time and method of appeal; that this rule required the petition for appeal to be filed within ten days of the decision; and that the record in the case at bar showed that this appeal is taken after that time. In the petition for rehearing the appellee moved to dismiss the appeal for the reason stated. Opportunity was given to the appellant to reply to this petition and he has done so by claiming that we cannot take judicial notice of the rules of the District Court of the United States for the Territory of Hawaii, and therefore we cannot know that the appeal was taken too late. It may be assumed that we will not take judicial notice of the rules of the lower court for many purposes. See Washington, A. & G. Steam Packet Co. v. Sickels, 19 Wall. (86 U. S.) 611, 615, 22 L. Ed. 203 . This does not solve the problem presented by the record for the reason the burden is…