U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Proposed Rules Changes, 3239-3240 [2012-1187]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 14 / Monday, January 23, 2012 / Notices
ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE
SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND
THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
In addition to those disclosures
generally permitted under 5 U.S.C.
552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, these
records contained therein may
specifically be disclosed outside the
DOD as a routine use pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:
To Federal, state, and local agencies
authorized to investigate, audit, act on,
negotiate, adjudicate, represent, or settle
claims or issues arising from litigation.
To agencies, entities, or individuals
who have or are expected to have
information concerning the claims or
litigation at issue.
To the Internal Revenue Service for
address verification or for matters under
their jurisdiction.
To Federal, state, and local
government agencies or other parties
involved in approving, licensing,
auditing, or otherwise having an
identified interest in intellectual
property issues.
To defense contractors who have an
identified interest in intellectual
property at issue.
The DoD ‘‘Blanket Routine Uses’’
apply to this system of records.
POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING,
RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND
DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
STORAGE:
Records may be stored on paper and
on electronic storage media.
RETRIEVABILITY:
Records are retrieved by record
subject’s name.
SAFEGUARDS:
Records are maintained in areas
accessible only to DLA personnel who
must use the records to perform their
duties. The computer files are password
protected with access restricted to
authorized users. Records are secured in
locked or guarded buildings, locked
offices, or locked cabinets during nonduty hours. All users of the records
must complete Information Assurance
Awareness and DoD PII Training
annually.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Claim records are destroyed 6 years
and 3 months after final settlement.
Litigation files are destroyed 6 years
after case closing except that patent
infringement litigation files are
destroyed after 26 years and copyright
infringement files are destroyed after 56
years.
SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:
General Counsel, Headquarters,
Defense Logistics Agency, 8725 John J.
17:58 Jan 20, 2012
NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:
Individuals seeking to determine
whether information about themselves
is contained in this system should
address written inquiries to the DLA
FOIA/Privacy Act Office, Headquarters,
Defense Logistics Agency, ATTN: DGA,
8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 1644,
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060–6221.
Inquiry should include name of
claimant/litigant, year of incident, and
should contain court case number in
order to ensure proper retrieval in those
situations where a single litigant has
more than one case with the Agency.
RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:
Individuals seeking access to
information about themselves contained
in this system should address written
inquiries to the DLA FOIA/Privacy Act
Office, Headquarters, Defense Logistics
Agency, ATTN: DGA, 8725 John J.
Kingman Road, Suite 1644, Fort Belvoir,
VA 22060–6221.
Inquiry should include name of
claimant/litigant, year of incident, and
should contain court case number in
order to ensure proper retrieval in those
situations where a single litigant has
more than one case with the Agency.
CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:
The DLA rules for accessing records,
for contesting contents, and appealing
initial agency determinations are
contained in 32 CFR part 323, or may
be obtained from the DLA FOIA/Privacy
Act Office, Headquarters, Defense
Logistics Agency, ATTN: DGA, 8725
John J. Kingman Road, Suite 1644, Fort
Belvoir, VA 22060–6221.
RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
Claimants, litigants, investigators, and
through legal discovery under the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedures.
EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:
None.
[FR Doc. 2012–1239 Filed 1–20–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Kingman Road, Suite 1644, Fort Belvoir,
VA 22060–6221 and the General
Counsel at the Defense Logistics Agency
Primary Level Field Activity.
Jkt 226001
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID DOD–2012–OS–0007]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed
Forces Proposed Rules Changes
Notice of Proposed Changes to
the Rules of Practice and Procedure of
ACTION:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3239
the United States Court of Appeals for
the Armed Forces.
This notice announces the
following proposed changes to Rules
13A, 19(b), and 27(a)(4) of the Rules of
Practice and Procedure, United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
DATES: Comments on the proposed
change must be received within 30 days
of the date of this notice.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and title by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive
East Tower, 2nd floor, Suite 02G09,
Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this Federal Register
document. The general policy for
comments and other submissions from
members of the public is to make these
submissions available for public
viewing on the Internet at https://
regulations.gov as they are received
without change, including personal
identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William A. DeCicco, Clerk of the Court,
telephone (202) 761–1448.
SUMMARY:
Dated: January 18, 2012.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
Rule 13A
The proposed change to Rule 13A
would add a new subparagraph (h) as
follows:
(h) Time Limitation. An amicus curiae
brief submitted under this Rule is not
subject to the time limitation in Rule
26(b), but such brief shall be filed no
less than 14 days before the scheduled
date for oral argument. Both the
appellant and the appellee may file a
reply to such brief within 7 days of the
filing thereof, subject to the limitations
specified in Rule 24(b) and (c).
Comment: The proposed change to
Rule 13A would provide that a brief
submitted under the Student Practice
Rule would not fall under the normal
deadline for filing amicus curiae briefs
provided in Rule 26(b) (requiring filing
within 10 days of the filing of the brief
of the party supported), but rather
would be due for filing no less than 14
days before the scheduled date for oral
argument. The proposal is intended to
eliminate the problem posed in Project
Outreach cases that are often selected
and/or calendared well beyond the date
for filing amicus curiae briefs. The
E:\FR\FM\23JAN1.SGM
23JAN1
3240
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 14 / Monday, January 23, 2012 / Notices
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
amended rule will allow these briefs to
be timely filed.
The proposal would not apply only to
Project Outreach cases. Rather, as a
general matter, law school clinical
programs do not operate continuously
through the year and may only become
aware of cases where they with to file
an amicus curiae brief well after the
brief can be timely filed. This rule will
better allow these programs to file briefs
with the Court and, thereby, the rules
will facilitate this vital part of law
school training for appellate advocates.
The proposed rule also gives the
Court and the parties sufficient time to
react to the student brief by requiring
that it be filed no less than 14 days
before oral argument and by allowing
the parties the opportunity to respond
within 7 days of the filing of the amicus
curiae brief.
Rule 19(b)
The first sentences of Rule 19(b)(1),
(2), and (3) currently read:
(b) Certificate for review/brief/
answer/reply.
(1) Article 62, UCMJ, cases. In cases
involving a decision by a Court of
Criminal Appeals on appeal by the
United States under Article 62, UCMJ,
10 U.S.C. 862, a certificate for review,
together with a supporting brief in
accordance with Rule 24 on behalf of
the appellant, shall be filed with the
Court by the Judge Advocate General no
later than 30 days after the date of the
decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals.
(2) Extraordinary relief cases. In cases
involving a decision by a Court of
Criminal Appeals on application for
extraordinary relief filed therein, a
certificate for review, together with a
supporting brief in accordance with
Rule 24 on behalf of the appellant, shall
be filed with the Court by the Judge
Advocate General no later than 30 days
after the date of the decision of the
Court of Criminal Appeals.
(3) Other cases. In all other cases
involving a decision by a Court of
Criminal Appeals, a certificate for
review filed by the Judge Advocate
General shall be filed either (a) no later
than 30 days after the date of the
decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals, or (b) no later than 30 days
after a petition for grant of review is
granted.
The proposed changes to the first
sentences of Rule 19(b)(1), (2) and (3)
would read:
(1) Article 62, UCMJ, cases. In cases
involving a decision by a Court of
Criminal Appeals on appeal by the
United States under Article 62, UCMJ,
10 U.S.C. 862, a certificate for review,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
together with a supporting brief in
accordance with Rule 24 on behalf of
the appellant, shall be filed with the
Court by the Judge Advocate General no
later than 60 days after the date of the
decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals.
(2) Extraordinary relief cases. In cases
involving a decision by a Court of
Criminal Appeals on application for
extraordinary relief filed therein, a
certificate for review, together with a
supporting brief in accordance with
Rule 24 on behalf of the appellant, shall
be filed with the Court by the Judge
Advocate General no later than 60 days
after the date of the decision of the
Court of Criminal Appeals.
(3) Other cases. In all other cases
involving a decision by a Court of
Criminal Appeals, a certificate for
review filed by the Judge Advocate
General shall be filed either (a) no later
than 60 days after the date of the
decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals, or (b) no later than 30 days
after a petition for grant of review is
granted.
Comment: Rule 19(b) currently allows
30 days for the filing of certificates for
review by the Judge Advocate General,
although a service member is given 60
days to file a petition for grant of
review. Extension requests are filed in
nearly all of the cases in which a
certificate is to be filed, and the Rules
Advisory Committee has determined
that the 30 days allowed by this rule is
insufficient time to obtain the necessary
approvals and to file the certificate.
This change to 60 days will not apply
in those cases where the Court grants a
petition for grant of review, and the
government wishes to request the Judge
Advocate General to file a certificate for
review. In that event, the Judge
Advocate General will continue to have
30 days from the date the petition is
granted to file the certificate for review.
The 30-day deadline in these cases
should not be extended because it will
slow the processing of the case by the
Court, and it will be less onerous
because the case is already before the
Court, making it easier for the services
to determine whether they wish to bring
additional issues before the Court in
those cases.
Rule 27(a)(4)
The proposed change would delete
Rule 27(a)(4) in its entirety:
(4) Electronic message petitions. The
Court will not docket petitions for
extraordinary relief submitted by means
of an electronic message or by facsimile
without prior approval of the Clerk.
Comment: This rule has become
obsolete. It permits the filing of
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
‘‘electronic message’’ petitions for
extraordinary relief with the permission
of the Clerk. This provision
contemplated the use of military
message traffic or facsimile to file such
petitions. However, with the use of the
current electronic filing program, the
filing of pleadings by military message
or facsimile is no longer necessary.
[FR Doc. 2012–1187 Filed 1–20–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Board on Coastal Engineering
Research
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
In accordance with Section
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463),
announcement is made of the following
committee meeting:
Name of Committee: Board on Coastal
Engineering Research.
DATES: Date of Meeting: February 7–8,
2012.
Place: Hearing Room, Kingman
Building, 7701 Telegraph Road,
Alexandria, VA 22315.
Time: 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (February 7,
2012), 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. (February 8,
2012).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Inquiries and notice of intent to attend
the meeting may be addressed to COL
Kevin J. Wilson, Executive Secretary,
U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center, Waterways
Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry
Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180–6199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board
provides broad policy guidance and
review of plans and fund requirements
for the conduct of research and
development of research projects in
consonance with the needs of the
coastal engineering field and the
objectives of the Chief of Engineers.
Proposed Agenda: On Tuesday,
February 7, the Executive Session is
devoted to addressing the role of the
Board on Coastal Engineering Research,
including the history of the Board,
discussion of the Board functions and
responsibilities, and ways to enhance
the value of the Board recommendations
to the Chief of Engineers. The Board
will also discuss the annual meeting
and executive sessions formats.
On Wednesday morning, February 8,
the Board will discuss pending action
items.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23JAN1.SGM
23JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 14 (Monday, January 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3239-3240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1187]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID DOD-2012-OS-0007]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Proposed Rules Changes
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Changes to the Rules of Practice and
Procedure of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the following proposed changes to Rules
13A, 19(b), and 27(a)(4) of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, United
States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
DATES: Comments on the proposed change must be received within 30 days
of the date of this notice.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and
title by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark
Center Drive East Tower, 2nd floor, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-
3100.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is
to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet
at https://regulations.gov as they are received without change,
including personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William A. DeCicco, Clerk of the
Court, telephone (202) 761-1448.
Dated: January 18, 2012.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
Rule 13A
The proposed change to Rule 13A would add a new subparagraph (h) as
follows:
(h) Time Limitation. An amicus curiae brief submitted under this
Rule is not subject to the time limitation in Rule 26(b), but such
brief shall be filed no less than 14 days before the scheduled date for
oral argument. Both the appellant and the appellee may file a reply to
such brief within 7 days of the filing thereof, subject to the
limitations specified in Rule 24(b) and (c).
Comment: The proposed change to Rule 13A would provide that a brief
submitted under the Student Practice Rule would not fall under the
normal deadline for filing amicus curiae briefs provided in Rule 26(b)
(requiring filing within 10 days of the filing of the brief of the
party supported), but rather would be due for filing no less than 14
days before the scheduled date for oral argument. The proposal is
intended to eliminate the problem posed in Project Outreach cases that
are often selected and/or calendared well beyond the date for filing
amicus curiae briefs. The
[[Page 3240]]
amended rule will allow these briefs to be timely filed.
The proposal would not apply only to Project Outreach cases.
Rather, as a general matter, law school clinical programs do not
operate continuously through the year and may only become aware of
cases where they with to file an amicus curiae brief well after the
brief can be timely filed. This rule will better allow these programs
to file briefs with the Court and, thereby, the rules will facilitate
this vital part of law school training for appellate advocates.
The proposed rule also gives the Court and the parties sufficient
time to react to the student brief by requiring that it be filed no
less than 14 days before oral argument and by allowing the parties the
opportunity to respond within 7 days of the filing of the amicus curiae
brief.
Rule 19(b)
The first sentences of Rule 19(b)(1), (2), and (3) currently read:
(b) Certificate for review/brief/answer/reply.
(1) Article 62, UCMJ, cases. In cases involving a decision by a
Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by the United States under Article
62, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. 862, a certificate for review, together with a
supporting brief in accordance with Rule 24 on behalf of the appellant,
shall be filed with the Court by the Judge Advocate General no later
than 30 days after the date of the decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals.
(2) Extraordinary relief cases. In cases involving a decision by a
Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief filed
therein, a certificate for review, together with a supporting brief in
accordance with Rule 24 on behalf of the appellant, shall be filed with
the Court by the Judge Advocate General no later than 30 days after the
date of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
(3) Other cases. In all other cases involving a decision by a Court
of Criminal Appeals, a certificate for review filed by the Judge
Advocate General shall be filed either (a) no later than 30 days after
the date of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, or (b) no
later than 30 days after a petition for grant of review is granted.
The proposed changes to the first sentences of Rule 19(b)(1), (2)
and (3) would read:
(1) Article 62, UCMJ, cases. In cases involving a decision by a
Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by the United States under Article
62, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. 862, a certificate for review, together with a
supporting brief in accordance with Rule 24 on behalf of the appellant,
shall be filed with the Court by the Judge Advocate General no later
than 60 days after the date of the decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals.
(2) Extraordinary relief cases. In cases involving a decision by a
Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief filed
therein, a certificate for review, together with a supporting brief in
accordance with Rule 24 on behalf of the appellant, shall be filed with
the Court by the Judge Advocate General no later than 60 days after the
date of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
(3) Other cases. In all other cases involving a decision by a Court
of Criminal Appeals, a certificate for review filed by the Judge
Advocate General shall be filed either (a) no later than 60 days after
the date of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, or (b) no
later than 30 days after a petition for grant of review is granted.
Comment: Rule 19(b) currently allows 30 days for the filing of
certificates for review by the Judge Advocate General, although a
service member is given 60 days to file a petition for grant of review.
Extension requests are filed in nearly all of the cases in which a
certificate is to be filed, and the Rules Advisory Committee has
determined that the 30 days allowed by this rule is insufficient time
to obtain the necessary approvals and to file the certificate.
This change to 60 days will not apply in those cases where the
Court grants a petition for grant of review, and the government wishes
to request the Judge Advocate General to file a certificate for review.
In that event, the Judge Advocate General will continue to have 30 days
from the date the petition is granted to file the certificate for
review. The 30-day deadline in these cases should not be extended
because it will slow the processing of the case by the Court, and it
will be less onerous because the case is already before the Court,
making it easier for the services to determine whether they wish to
bring additional issues before the Court in those cases.
Rule 27(a)(4)
The proposed change would delete Rule 27(a)(4) in its entirety:
(4) Electronic message petitions. The Court will not docket
petitions for extraordinary relief submitted by means of an electronic
message or by facsimile without prior approval of the Clerk.
Comment: This rule has become obsolete. It permits the filing of
``electronic message'' petitions for extraordinary relief with the
permission of the Clerk. This provision contemplated the use of
military message traffic or facsimile to file such petitions. However,
with the use of the current electronic filing program, the filing of
pleadings by military message or facsimile is no longer necessary.
[FR Doc. 2012-1187 Filed 1-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P