Waxman v. Evans

Full title: Henry A. WAXMAN; William Lacy Clay; Tom Lantos; Major R. Owens; Edolphus…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 6, 2002

52 F. App'x 84 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

52 Fed.Appx. 84 (9th Cir. 2002) Henry A. WAXMAN; William Lacy Clay; Tom Lantos; Major R. Owens; Edolphus Towns; Patsy T. Mink; Bernard Sanders; Carolyn B. Maloney; Eleanor Holmes Norton; Elijah E. Cummings, Dennis J. Kucinich; Rod R. Blagojevich; Danny K. Davis; John F. Tierney; Thomas H. Allen; Janice D. Schakowsky, Members of the United States Congress, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Donald L. EVANS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 02-55825. D.C. No. CV-01-04530-LGB. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. December 6, 2002

Argued September 10, 2002.

Resubmitted December 4, 2002.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Lourdes G. Baird, District Judge, Presiding.

Before GOODWIN, T.G. NELSON, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

ORDER ^*

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Our decision in Carter v. United States Department of Commerce, 307 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir.2002), renders this action moot. We REVERSE and VACATE the judgment below and REMAND to the district court with instructions to DISMISS the action as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950) (explaining the "established practice" followed when pending appeals become moot "through happenstance"). The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.