United States v. Jose Molina-Tarazon

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 3507·285 F.3d 807·2002 WL 485711·52 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 574·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2891
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 2, 200200-50171California392 words

Opinion

Opinion

ORDER

The United States seeks leave to file a Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing en Banc that is 19 pages and 5505 words long. See Fed. R.App. P. 35(b)(2) (limiting petitions for rehearing en banc to 15 pages); Fed. R.App. P. 40(b) (limiting petitions for rehearing to 15 pages); 9th Cir. R. 40-1 (allowing alternate length limitations of 4200 words or 390 lines of text). Counsel advises us that his original draft was 30 pages long, and the petition was “extensively reviewed by members of our Appellate Section, with the intent to reduce the length.” We gather these efforts were not entirely successful. Counsel concludes: “I believe that this is as short as the petition can reasonably be and still do justice to the important and difficult issue raised in this appeal.”

[1-3] Leave to file a fat brief will be granted only upon a showing of diligence and substantial need.” 9th Cir. R. 32-2. Counsel’s belief that he has exhausted his ability to edit the brief is not a showing of “diligence and substantial need. To satisfy this standard, counsel must show that the additional space is justified by something unusual about the issues presented, the record, the applicable caselaw or some…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.