Moreover, this would then require federal district court judges and clerks to designate in an open and official way which decisions were to be published, something that does not occur today. Of course, it should occur, and perhaps we believe it will occur some day . . . So, the quest of sequence number identification is not practical until other issues are resolved such as Federal District Court opinion bulletin boards, on or off the Internet. No additional action by the court is required in order to create the case identifier. Citation to older cases is possible.
Redundancy is provided.
Citation to unpublished cases is possible. It provides an immediate indicator of a relationship amongst orders, rehearings, etc. We note that the new Louisiana Citation includes the docket number, and we have been advised that one of the major reasons for the demise of the 1991-1992 U.S. Judicial Conference proposal was its eschewal of docket numbers as part of the citation. We do not understand this objection. A citation system should work equally well for published and upublished opinions.