No. 25-16
Larry Elliott Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc., et al.
Tags: appellate-review attorney-fees court-of-appeals district-court judicial-procedure magistrate-recommendation
Key Terms:
DueProcess Trademark
DueProcess Trademark
Latest Conference:
2025-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit err in affirming the district court's order regarding attorney's fees and costs?
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. D id the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“DC Circuit”) err by affirming the order of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (“District Court”) adopting Magistrate Judge Michael G. Harvey’s Report and Recommendation regarding Defendants’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs?
Docket Entries
2025-10-06
Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2025-10-06
Notice of Intent to File Petition for Rehearing of Larry Klayman submitted.
2025-08-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-06-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 4, 2025)
Attorneys
Larry Klayman
Larry Elliot Klayman — Klayman Law Group, P.A., Petitioner
Larry Elliot Klayman — Klayman Law Group, P.A., Petitioner