Case Name: Mildred LEWIS, et al. v. Danford L. SAWYER, Public Printer, U.S. Printing Office, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1983-02-04
Citations: 698 F.2d 1261
Docket Number: No. 82-1911
Parties: Mildred LEWIS, et al. v. Danford L. SAWYER, Public Printer, U.S. Printing Office, Appellant.
Judges: Before WRIGHT, TAMM and WALD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 698
Pages: 1261–1265

Head Matter:
Mildred LEWIS, et al. v. Danford L. SAWYER, Public Printer, U.S. Printing Office, Appellant.
No. 82-1911.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Nov. 12, 1982.
Decided Feb. 4, 1983.
Robert C. Seldon, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., with whom Stanley S. Harris, U.S. Atty., Royce C. Lamberth and R. Craig Lawrence, Asst. U.S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellant.
George B. Driesen, Washington, D.C., for appellees.
Before WRIGHT, TAMM and WALD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM.
This cause came on to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was briefed and argued by counsel. The issues presented have been accorded full consideration by the court; they occasion no need for an opinion. See D.C.Cir. Rule 13(c).
This court is in agreement with the result reached by the District Court in this case, generally for the reasons stated in its Memorandum Opinion filed July 2, 1982. See Joint Appendix at 15-24.
On consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED by this court that the judgment of the District Court appealed from in this cause is hereby affirmed.
It is FURTHER ORDERED by this court, sua sponte, that the Clerk shall withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir. Rule 14, as amended November 30, 1981 and June 25, 1982.
Circuit Judge WALD files the attached concurring statement.
After hearing oral argument, the court asked the parties to submit briefs addressing the question whether the Resolution adopted by the Joint Committee on Printing on May 11, 1982 violated separation of powers doctrine. Having considered these briefs, the court is of the view that we should not attempt to decide that question on this record, particularly since none of the parties has raised it.