Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 653.0

806 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2009 

October  5,  2009 

558  U. S. 

No.  09–5190.  Reger  v.  Walker  et  al.  C.  A.  5th  Cir.  Mo­
tion  of  petitioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma  pauperis  denied, 
and  certiorari  dismissed.  See  this  Court’s  Rule  39.8.  Reported 
below:  312  Fed.  Appx.  624. 

No. 09–5214.  Edmond v.  Mississippi.  Sup. Ct. Miss.  Motion 
of  petitioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma  pauperis  denied, 
and  certiorari  dismissed.  See  this  Court’s  Rule  39.8.  Reported 
below:  991  So.  2d  588. 

No.  09–5281.  Butcher  v.  Guthrie,  Judge,  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Texas,  et  al. 
C. A. 5th Cir.  Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma 
pauperis  denied,  and  certiorari  dismissed.  See  this  Court’s  Rule 
39.8.  Reported  below:  332  Fed.  Appx.  161. 

No.  09–5289.  Moore  v.  Schuetzle,  Warden.  C.  A.  8th  Cir. 
Motion  of  petitioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma  pauperis  de­
nied,  and  certiorari  dismissed.  See  this  Court’s  Rule  39.8. 

No. 09–5290.  Muniz v.  New Mexico.  Sup. Ct. N. M.  Motion 
of  petitioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma  pauperis  denied, 
and  certiorari  dismissed.  See  this  Court’s  Rule  39.8.  Reported 
below:  146  N.  M.  642,  213  P.  3d  792. 

No.  09–5356.  Curto  v.  Siwek.  C.  A.  2d  Cir.  Motion  of  peti­
tioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma  pauperis  denied,  and  certio­
rari dismissed.  See this Court’s Rule 39.8.  Justice Sotomayor 
took  no  part  in  the  consideration  or  decision  of  this  motion  and 
this  petition.  Reported  below:  322  Fed.  Appx.  62. 

No.  09–5383.  Glover  v.  Thurmer,  Warden.  C.  A.  7th  Cir. 
Motion  of  petitioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma  pauperis  de­
nied,  and  certiorari  dismissed.  See  this  Court’s  Rule  39.8.  As 
petitioner  has  repeatedly  abused  this  Court’s  process,  the  Clerk 
is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal mat­
ters  from  petitioner  unless  the  docketing  fee  required  by  Rule 
38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 
33.1.  See  Martin  v.  District  of  Columbia  Court  of  Appeals,  506 
U. S.  1  (1992)  (per  curiam).  Justice  Stevens  dissents.  See 
id.,  at  4,  and  cases  cited  therein. 

No.  09–5398.  Jaffe  v.  US  Airways,  Inc.,  et  al.  Ct. 
App.  Ariz.  Motion  of  petitioner  for  leave  to  proceed  in  forma