Journal October Term 2010 - Supreme Court of the United States

(JOURNAL) MONDAY, MAY 2, 2011 825
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Present: Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kennedy, Justice Thomas,
Justice Ginsburg, Justice Alito, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan.
The Chief Justice said:
“We have issued orders today, they have been duly entered and certified,
and filed with the Clerk.”
Opinion Per Curiam
No. 10–1000. David Bobby, Warden, Petitioner v. Harry Mitts. On
petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Sixth Circuit. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment reversed.
Opinion per curiam.
Certiorari—Summary Dispositions
No. 09–1521. United States, Petitioner v. Eastern Shawnee Tribe of
Oklahoma. On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Petition for writ of certiorari
granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for further consideration in
light of United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation, 563 U. S. ––– (2011).
Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this
petition.
No. 10–315. Sonic Automotive, Inc., dba Century BMW, Petitioner
v. Christine Watts, et al. On petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme
Court of South Carolina. Petition for writ of certiorari granted.
Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Supreme Court of South
Carolina for further consideration in light of AT&T Mobility LLC v.
Concepcion, 563 U. S. ––– (2011).
No. 10–398. Cellco Partnership, dba Verizon Wireless, Petitioner v.
Keith Litman, et al.; and
No. 10–551. Keith Litman, et al., Petitioners v. Cellco Partnership,
dba Verizon Wireless. On petitions for writs of certiorari to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Petitions for writs of
certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and cases remanded to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit for further consideration
in light of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U. S. –––
(2011).