Internal Operating Procedures - page 9

4
(A) the single-judge memorandum decision overlooked or misunderstood a fact or
point of law and that error was prejudicial to the outcome of the appeal, or
(B) the single-judge memorandum decision is in conflict with precedential decisions
of the Court, or
(C) the appeal otherwise raises an issue warranting a precedential decision.
If a majority of the panel find that the movant has not demonstrated that the single-judge
decision should be withdrawn, the panel shall direct that the single-judge decision
remains the decision of the Court. In such instance, the panel's decision is
nonprecedential and the single-judge decision remains nonprecedential.
(5) A request for panel decision should be given priority consideration, consistent with
Section V, below.
(6) If a case issued by a Senior Judge is subject to a motion by the parties for reconsideration
or panel consideration, the Chief Judge shall determine whether the Senior Judge is
available to consider the motion and serve on any resultant panel.
See
Policy for the
Recall of Senior Judges.
(b) Subsequent Appeals.
(1)
Of Single-Judge Remands
.
(A) In the interests of judicial efficiency, for any subsequent appeal of a Board
decision on a matter previously remanded by a single Judge, CLS prepares an
evaluation of the matter and refers it to the author Judge of the remanded decision
with a notation that the case is related to one that was previously before the Judge. If
the author Judge is not available, the case is assigned according to the normal process,
as described in Section I(a)(3), above.
(B) The author Judge promptly reviews any such case and if the author Judge
determines that the new appeal involves substantially the same issue(s) raised in the
prior appeal, the Judge retains the case for appropriate disposition and directs the
Clerk to assign the matter to that Judge. If the author Judge determines that the new
appeal involves new issues, the Judge returns the case for assignment to a Judge
(potentially including that Judge) according to the normal process, as described in
Section I(a)(3), above.
(2)
Of Panel-Ordered Remands.
(A) In the interests of judicial efficiency, for any subsequent appeal of a Board
decision on a matter previously remanded by panel, CLS prepares an evaluation of
the matter and refers it to the author Judge of the panel, if available, with a notation
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,...22
Powered by FlippingBook