Case Name: William R. KERR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael A. DITTMANN, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-30
Citations: 468 F. App'x 636
Docket Number: No. 09-1032
Parties: William R. KERR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael A. DITTMANN, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge, DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge, DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 468
Pages: 636–636

Head Matter:
William R. KERR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael A. DITTMANN, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 09-1032.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted April 27, 2012.
Decided May 30, 2012.
Douglas J. Marsch, Attorney Chicago, IL, for Petitioner.
Katherine D. Lloyd, Office of the Attorney General Wisconsin Department of Justice, Madison, WI, for Respondent.
Before MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge, DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge, DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
After the district court's decision denying William Kerr's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, this court vacated its judgment and remanded the case for Kerr to develop his factual claims. Kerr v. Thurmer, 639 F.3d 315 (7th Cir.2011). Respondent then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court, which granted the petition, vacated our judgment, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Lafler v. Cooper, - U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1376, 182 L.Ed.2d 398 (2012). Pursuant to Circuit Rule 54, the parties have now filed a joint statement discussing what action they believe to be appropriate. They have indicated that no further action in this court is needed at this time, and thus that the case can simply be remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with La-fler. We agree with that position, and so we hereby order the case Remanded for this purpose.