No. 22-17

Vaxima, Inc., et al. v. United States

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-07-06
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: 28-usc-2461 breach-of-contract criminal-conviction criminal-forfeiture honeycutt-decision honeycutt-v-united-states indictment statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a criminal forfeiture judgment against Petitioners is permitted under Honeycutt

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a criminal forfeiture judgment against Petitioners Vaxima, Inc. and GenPhar, Inc. (collectively “Petitioners”) under 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), is permitted under this Court’s decision in Honeycutt v. United States, 1387S. Ct. 1626 (2017) (“Honeycutt”). 2. Whether a criminal conviction can be supported by an indictment alleging that Petitioners’ conduct amounted to breach of contract.

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-07-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-07-13
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
Main DocumentMain Document
2022-06-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 5, 2022)
PetitionAppendixCertificate of Word CountProof of ServicePetitionAppendixCertificate of Word Count

Attorneys

United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Vaxima, Inc., et al.
Robert Edward Barnes — Barnes law, Petitioner
Robert Edward Barnes — Barnes law, Petitioner