953 F. 2d 688 - Snead v. A Mosbacher
953 F2d 688 Snead v. A Mosbacher
953 F.2d 688
293 U.S.App.D.C. 292
Carl E. SNEAD, Appellant,
v.
Robert A. MOSBACHER, Secretary of Commerce.
No. 91-5039.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Jan. 30, 1992.
NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant.
Before MIKVA, Chief Judge, and RUTH BADER GINSBURG and BUCKLEY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
PER CURIAM
Advertisement
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance and the response thereto, the motion for summary reversal and the response thereto, and the court's May 14, 1991 order to show cause, it is
ORDERED that the show cause order be discharged. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary reversal be denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted substantially for the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum opinion filed January 9, 1991. See also Rao v. Baker, 898 F.2d 191, 192-97 (D.C.Cir.1990); Josiah-Faeduwor v. Communications Satellite Corp., 785 F.2d 344, 346-47 (D.C.Cir.1986). The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to justify summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C.Cir.) (per curiam ), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980).
The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.Rule 15.