Court Opinion

ID: 9392871
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-08 16:00:38.98761+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:49.440782
License: Public Domain

FOR PUBLICATION

     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
          FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LARRY STEVEN WILKINS; JANE                        No. 20-35745
B. STANTON,
                                                D.C. No. 9:18-cv-
                  Plaintiffs-Appellants,          00147-DLC

    v.
                                                     ORDER
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                  Defendant-Appellee.

         On Remand from the United States Supreme Court

                        Filed May 8, 2023

Before: EBEL, * BRESS, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

*
 The Honorable David M. Ebel, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, sitting by designation.
2                    WILKINS V. UNITED STATES

                          SUMMARY **

                         Quiet Title Act

  On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court in Wilkins v.
United States, 143 S. Ct. 870, 871 (2023) (holding that the
Quiet Title Act’s 12-year time limitation, 28 U.S.C. §
2409a(g), is a non-jurisdictional claims-processing rule, and
reversing a decision of the Ninth Circuit, published at 13
F.4th 791 (9th Cir. 2021)), the panel remanded to the district
court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme
Court’s decision.

                           COUNSEL

Jeffrey W. McCoy (argued), Pacific Legal Foundation,
Highlands Ranch, Colorado; Damien M. Schiff and Ethan
Blevins, Pacific Legal Foundation, Sacramento, California;
James M. Manley, Pacific Legal Foundation, Phoenix,
Arizona; for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Kevin W. McArdle (argued), Mark Steger Smith, John M.
Newman, and John L. Smeltzer, Attorneys; Jean E.
Williams, Acting Assistant Attorney General; Environment
and Natural Resources Division, United States Department
of Justice; Washington, D.C.; Babak Rastgoufard, Attorney;
Office of the General Counsel, United States Department of
Agriculture; Washington, D.C.; for Defendant-Appellee.

**
  This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has
been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.
                  WILKINS V. UNITED STATES                 3

                         ORDER

        The United States Supreme Court reversed the
judgment in this case and remanded the case to this court for
further proceedings. See Wilkins v. United States, 143 S. Ct.
870, 881 (2023). We remand this case to the district court
for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s
decision.
      The copy of this order shall act as and for the
mandate of this court.
       REMANDED.