No. 18-8287

Gregory D. Kilpatrick v. Uttam Dhillon, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2019-03-05
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure-standing-patent-takings-due-proce administrative-law civil-rights controlled-substances-act due-process equal-protection standing
Latest Conference: 2019-04-18
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the DEA's denial of a petition to reschedule marijuana violates the Controlled Substances Act and the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : 7 ME TSLLEOV IH) 1) Wikt [P2752 Lag EM nem Aastra MED (FHACOTCY SA) Ab GGG ae Tp ef) AMAIGES (ee Meh (QO) WHY pyb Soe. tou hrf Rp /TEV jie VTEV. 65) fie THE KESTS DM /7Ya pvO [brer 3 ELV II-72) Qiesr1 bal NOMBER WIage,C Wel) AVE. é, ; W/ i) NE fase ove Li SESS Ge AT PS (Le PDENBEC Yl bibwor 6 PT SA Cont pT SF NOAS (LGALL INE , ( L Ue ane Yd 3 LOE elbeerions (AEE TED? © WI AT [FDS @ OE (V0 700 eto F078 2 (@) “ yy 13 Lig oi ee Se swage ine, oe WS E3204 IN How f/ VIOVIE EC 5) LUE Lp GEIE GLEN E Vn ee ee Lilt pewe“ssé | 781A (7HO5O © FP uphy 0. ff a7 sa. Albi ve wrt EBL OTN UC) THAT Z iby Oo barton! Dou 7 LW Wwe eye)? pL ZAeSE ST TON, yy’ (Ok (HUEMALES 5 [BEIM phic Polswide Tht Vie LELIOLLTE: AUD 6 L4MES (GE es Ate Fitts Ft MENT fh. °) WHEN SHOTS Gees Filold (STENT 76, MEDICAL. s) 4d MENT DOES igi AND. Ws oe Re V5. CAE yt Ly OVE IEITSA AWS 1b 162AS flOM VASAT able 1p aE EEE obune C" 9) Mil AE WP ITS2A> WM fib, Dora ny ss jon bh OT bo teal age (aeiehgtod Df PME toe MwEFEMALE FILINGS, OF far TENTS, AWD MEDICAL SOL . | os ; me LUST OF PARTIES , | i | . vt appear in the caption of the case 0 the cover nai . DEA poMinsrpime"herngh ayes. wpe lactypee-— [FAM PHAM a SANE ELD, Vitebiwth IYSG-769G PAREN N: LECISTONTTN SECTION — OfE, péAa~ 94 TENTH IV EWE oi! , eal othe tiry, Wy (l é LENDING ~ GLIMINALUG 2175 OF WE W/ DOE: ETAL nD | (00 CENTER Sei EW otk try CTSA yy WE he, JOU ay a ECL LG Aa i TUMIsblerion{” of ol S7ALET, DEON, WELW SUR CTY ; TGA — oe | Maopgliae: Covet 2170 & NEW fk | . Wo! Cotale Lib, ea Hb WEW YOR LG VEU Yl (FS an WED SES SPELT ide Dn sto forte Be Voie. Li, WE Yokes /013 oc Cpe iif COUT. Cir OF. MEU! J Oe WSCHEe / Sif , eye Ha — : : woe

Docket Entries

2019-04-22
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the 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 the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2019-04-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/18/2019.
2019-04-01
Waiver of right of respondent Dhillon, Uttam to respond filed.
2019-02-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 4, 2019)

Attorneys

Dhillon, Uttam
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Gregory Kilpatrick
Gregory D. Kilpatrick — Petitioner