Whether the Second Amendment prohibits criminalizing possession of non-functional, destroyed firearm relics under the National Firearms Act without conducting an as-applied inquiry under the Bruen standard

No question identified. : Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) has, for decades, permitted the unrestricted commercial sale, resulting in Applicant’s 20-year sentence, which the Fourth Circuit affirmed per curiam. 3. Applicant was charged with with the knowing “recei[pt] and possess[ion of] a firearm, namely a PPSH machinegun, which was not registered” to him in “violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5841, 5845, 5861 (d) and 5871.” §5845 contains no less than seven independent definitions of “machinegun,” each with divergent essential elements, none of which contemplate the inoperable, destroyed relics Applicant possessed. Each of the charges in the indictment were this conclusory. Applicant “ moved to dismiss the indictment as it failed to state the elements “without any uncertainty or ambiguity” United States v. Carll, 105 U.S. 611 (1881), and the district court denied the motion. Applicant further moved to dismiss the indictment on Second Amendment grounds, asserting that if the Act did cover destroyed, nonfunctional relics as charged, that the Government must prove the attachment of felony consequences to the simple possession of such articles consistent with longstanding precedent. 4. Applicant anticipates filing a petition that demonstrates the error in the Fourth Circuit’s affirmance of the District Court. First, the Fourth Circuit overlooked or misapprehended the undisputed record evidence that all items underlying Appellant’s convictions were non-functional relics requiring material alteration and fabrication, not mere assembly, to become NFA-subject weapons. This renders the evidence legally insufficient under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) and (f) as interpreted by United States v. Thompson/ Center Arms Co., 504 U.S. 505 (1992), Cargill v. Garland, 602 U.S. 240 (2024), and Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 (1994). Second, the Fourth Circuit misapprehended and failed to address Appellant’s preserved Second Amendment challenge treating the challenged conduct as categorically valid without conducting an “as applied” inquiry under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). See United States v. Hemani, No. 24-1234, 2025 WL 2949569 (Oct. 20, 2025). Third, the Fourth Circuit panel labored under the erroneous premise that a bill of particulars would have cured the notice issues in the indictment, contrary to the “settled rule that a bill of particulars cannot save an invalid indictment.” Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749 (1962). 5. Applicant’s counsel, Mark Pennak and Matthew Larosiere, require additional time to prepare a petition that fully addresses the important issues raised by the decision below in a manner that will be most helpful to the Court. 6. Mr. Pennak only recently became involved in this action, and needs additional time to review the record and ensure the petition fully addresses the issues on appeal. 7. Mr. Larosiere’s primary office computer failed in early December, removing access to the materials he had been preparing for several weeks. Additionally, Mr. Larosiere is a Type 1 diabetic and fell ill in early January, with a prolonged fever substantially impairing his ability to prepare the petition. Finally, Mr. Larosiere has trial court obligations in Central Florida on February 6, which has further frustrated his ability to timely prepare a petition with the quality the issues on appeal demand. WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that an extension of time to and including March 12, 2026, be granted within which Applicant may file a petition for writ of certiorari. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Mark W. Pennak MARK W. PENNAK 9613 Harford Rd Ste C #1015 Baltimore, MD 21234-2150 Tel: (801) 873-3671 Counsel of Record /s/ Matthew Larosiere* MATTHEW LAROSIERE The Law Office of Matthew Larosiere 6964 Houlton Cir, Lake Worth FL 33467 Tel: (561) 452 7575 *Admission Pending DATED: January 31, 2026. No. IN THE Supreme Court of the Anited States PATRICK TA