No. 19-6087
Atif Babar Malik v. United States
IFP
Tags: appellate-procedure charged-statute circuit-split cotton-precedent criminal-procedure due-process jurisdiction jurisdictional-challenge scope-of-statute statutory-interpretation subject-matter-jurisdiction united-states-v-cotton
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2020-02-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Do courts lack subject matter jurisdiction when alleged conduct falls outside the scope of the charged statute?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW DO COURTS LACK SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION WHEN ALLEGED CONDUCT FALLS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE CHARGED STATUTE? ii
Docket Entries
2020-02-24
Petition DENIED.
2020-01-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.
2020-01-08
Reply of petitioner Atif Malik filed.
2019-12-27
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-11-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 27, 2019 to December 27, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-11-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 27, 2019.
2019-10-25
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 27, 2019.
2019-10-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 28, 2019 to November 27, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-09-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 28, 2019)
Attorneys
Atif Malik
Joanna Silver — Office of The Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Joanna Silver — Office of The Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent