Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 659.0

812 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2009 

October  5,  2009 

558  U. S. 

No. 08–10333.  Moore v.  United States District Court for 
the  Western  District  of  Washington.  C.  A.  9th  Cir.  Mo­
tion  of  petitioner  for  reconsideration  of  order  denying  leave  to 
proceed  in  forma  pauperis  [557  U. S.  901]  denied. 

No.  08–10440.  Ford  v.  Christiana  Care  Health  Systems 

et  al.  C.  A.  3d  Cir.; 

et  al.  C.  A.  6th  Cir.; 

No.  08–10625.  GwanJun  Kim  v.  Department  of  Labor 

No.  08–10997.  Williams  v.  Church’s  Chicken  et  al.  Ct. 

App.  Cal.,  2d  App.  Dist.; 

No. 09–5205.  Nicoloudakis v.  Abraham, Philadelphia Dis­

trict  Attorney,  et  al.  C.  A.  3d  Cir.; 

No.  09–5294.  Ortega  v.  Napa  County,  California.  Ct. 

App.  Cal.,  1st  App.  Dist.; 

No.  09–5305.  Corines  v.  Broward  County  Sheriff’s  De­

partment  et  al.  C.  A.  11th  Cir.; 

No.  09–5346.  Potter  v.  South  Coast  Plumbing  Systems, 

Inc.,  et  al.  Ct.  App.  Cal.,  4th  App.  Dist.,  Div.  2; 

No.  09–5400.  Menke  v.  Gaddy  et  al.  Ct.  App.  N.  M.; 
No.  09–5448.  Rodriguez  v.  Quality  Engineering  Prod­

ucts  et  al.  Dist.  Ct.  App.  Fla.,  1st  Dist.; 

No.  09–5496.  Abbey  v.  United  States.  C.  A.  11th  Cir.; 
No.  09–5515.  Quinn  v.  United  States.  C.  A.  10th  Cir.;  and 
No.  09–5728.  Hollis  v.  United  States.  C.  A.  7th  Cir.  Mo­
tions of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. 
Petitioners  are  allowed  until  October  26,  2009,  within  which  to 
pay  the  docketing  fees  required  by  Rule  38(a)  and  to  submit  peti­
tions  in  compliance  with  Rule  33.1  of  the  Rules  of  this  Court. 

No.  08–10564.  In  re  Smith; 
No.  08–10988.  In  re  Corines; 
No.  08–11038.  In  re  Simmons; 
No.  08–11050.  In  re  Salazar; 
No.  09–5139.  In  re  Ortiz; 
No.  09–5156.  In  re  Morrison; 
No.  09–5213.  In  re  Martinez; 
No.  09–5308.  In  re  Johnson; 
No.  09–5606.  In  re  Stamps; 
No.  09–5696.  In  re  Usher; 
No.  09–5719.  In  re  Bojonquez; 
No.  09–5753.  In  re  Gordon;