OT2015Journal

248 MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2015
No. 15–307. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Petitioner v. Apotex Inc.
Petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit denied. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration
or decision of these petitions.
No. 15–419. Louis P. Cannon, et al., Petitioners v. District of Columbia.
Petition for relief to the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit denied.
No. 15–5965. Domenic Tricome, Petitioner v. Paul LaRiviere, et al.
Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and
petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia Office, dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly
abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept
any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the
docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in
compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court
of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
No. 15–6002. Teddy Moore, Petitioner v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. Motion
of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition
for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
No. 15–6177. David E. Hill, Petitioner v. Rudolph Contreras, Judge,
United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Motion of
petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition
for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
Habeas Corpus Denied
No. 15–6529. In Re Donald Lee McDonald, Petitioner; and
No. 15–6562. In Re Edward D. Curtis, Petitioner. Petitions for writs
of habeas corpus denied.
No. 15–6559. In Re Terrance James-Bey, Petitioner. Motion of petitioner
for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for
writ of habeas corpus dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly
abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept
any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the
docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in
compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court
of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).