CA 18 3083 v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Damien GUEDES, et al., Appellants Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., CA 18-3083, Appellee v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, et al., Appellees

No. 19-5042

Decided: April 01, 2019

Before: Henderson, Srinivasan and Millett, Circuit Judges

Joshua Prince, Esquire, Adam Kraut, Prince Law Office, P.C., Bechtelsville, PA, Erik Scott Jaffe, Schaerr Jaffe LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs-Appellants Damien Guedes, Shane Roden, Firearms Policy Foundation, Madison Society Foundation, Inc., Florida Carry, Inc. Stephen Dean Stamboulieh, Esquire, Stamboulieh Law, PLLC, Madison, MS, Alan Beck, Law Office of Alan Beck, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants David Codrea, Owen Monroe, Scott Heuman Thomas Che Goldstein, Daniel Woofter, Charles H. Davis, Goldstein & Russell, PC, Bethesda, MD, for Plaintiff-Appellee Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc. Bradley Hinshelwood, Trial Attorney, Hashim M. Mooppan, Esquire, Attorney, Matthew J. Glover, Scott R. McIntosh, Attorney, Abby Christine Wright, U.S. Department of Justice, (DOJ) Office of the Attorney General, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees William P. Barr, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Thomas E. Brandon, United States of America Ilya Shapiro, Esquire, The Cato Institute, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae for Appellant Cato Institute Ian Simmons, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae for Appellee Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Steven M. Simpson, New Civil Liberties Alliance, Washington, DC, for Amici Curiae for Appellants W. Clark Aposhian, The New Civil Liberties Alliance Conor Shaw, Counsel, Nikhel Suresh Sus, Esquire, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Washington, DC, for Amici Curiae for Appellants Virginia Canter, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Don Fox, Marilyn Glynn, Karen Kucik, Richard Painter, Lawrence Reynolds, Trip Rothschild Stephen Adam Weisbrod, Attorney, Weisbrod Matteis & Copley PLLC, Washington, DC, for Amici Curiae for Appellants Erwin Chemerinsky, Alan B. Morrison, Victoria Nourse, Peter M. Shane, Jed Shugerman Joseph Carl Cecere, Jr., Attorney, Cecere PC, Dallas, TX, for Amicus Curiae for Appellant Morton Rosenberg

JUDGMENT

These causes came to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and were argued by counsel. On consideration thereof, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the District Court’s denial of the preliminary injunction appealed from in these causes be affirmed, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the administrative stay of the effective date of the Bump Stock Rule, 83 Fed. Reg. 66,514 (Dec. 26, 2018), that was entered on the court’s own motion on March 23, 2019, will remain in effect for 48 hours from the time of the issuance of the opinion in this case to allow plaintiffs, if they wish, to seek a stay from the Supreme Court of the United States. Should plaintiffs do so, the administrative stay will remain in effect pending disposition of the stay application. Plaintiffs are directed to notify the court promptly should an application for a stay be filed. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Codrea plaintiffs-appellants’ notice of voluntary dismissal of Whitaker-based claim in No. 19-5044, construed by the court as a motion for voluntary dismissal, be denied.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate pending resolution of any stay application filed in the Supreme Court. Plaintiffs are directed to notify the court promptly of the disposition of a stay application. If plaintiffs do not seek a stay from the Supreme Court, the Clerk is directed to issue the mandate 48 hours after the opinion in these consolidated cases issues. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41(a)(1).

Opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part filed by Circuit Judge Henderson.

Per Curiam

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law