I just want to put forth another possibility.
It is quite possible ( I did not say probable) that the 9th Circuit could accept jurisdiction and the appeal in order to ratify and place into authoritative case law that the essential portion of Judge Wake's fundamental ruling(s) that the establishment of USAPA and its constitution could not be used abrogate the final and binding seniority decision that had been handed down via ALPA merger policy prior to the election of USAPA as the sole bargaining agent for the pilots at the merged US Airways. The 9th Circuit **could** decide that it wants to make the fundamental rulings of Judge Wake mandatory autority within its jurisdiction, which would make it also secondary authority for all other federal courts and also at the US Supreme Court as long as the US Supreme Court did not ever accept jurisdiction and hand down any written opinion. (In other words, other attorneys in other cases could then cite any 9th Circuit opinion in Addington in any other courts outside the 9th Circuit as a persuasive authority until Addington would be otherwise distinguished or over-ruled as authority on any applicable points of law.)
How and why the 9th Circuit may decide whether or not to accept the appeal for judicial review will not be readily known to any of us.
Fed. R. App. P. 3
APPEAL AS OF RIGHT - HOW TAKEN
(a) Filing the Notice of Appeal.
(1)
An appeal permitted by law as of right from a district court to a court
of appeals may be taken only by filing a notice of appeal with the
district clerk within the time allowed by Rule 4. At the time of filing,
the appellant must furnish the clerk with enough copies of the
notice to enable the clerk to comply with Rule 3(d).
(a) Appeal in a Civil Case.
(1) Time for Filing a Notice of Appeal.
(A) In a civil case, except as provided in Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 4(a)(4), and 4©, the notice of appeal required by Fed. R. App. P. 3
must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after the judgment or order appealed from is entered.
It IS readily known!!!
As you so typically overlook many of the salient details regarding your expert "para"legal commentary, I would advise you to dust off your copy of Black's Law Dictionary (what version do you have, if any...2nd? 9th is current as of now) and review "law as of right" as far as appeals are concerned. The only issue USAPA needs concern itself with is following the RULES. If they do, there WILL be an appeal...AS OF RIGHT.
Once the DISTRICT judge determines that the trial is over he will FORMALLY announce this as so (called an ORDER). It is the same as in state court. I should know as I have filed two appeals in North Carolina as a Pro Se. The appellate court MUST accept jurisdiction if properly undertaken by the appealing party....as of RIGHT! The District court must establish when their jurisdiction is over. (see above time for filing).
Here is the link to 9th Cir. FRAP.
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/rules/
Here is the link to Amazon to get your LATEST copy of Black's Law Dictionary:
http://www.amazon.com/Blacks-Law-Dictionar...5451&sr=1-4
Just thought I could assist you with providing the source for legal materials. Just wondering if you know what FRAP is?
As far as your contention that the Appeals court has some kind of "choice" as to whether or not they "want to make case law" is simply NOT how the appeals process works. In short, if you don't know what you're talking about, WHICH YOU DON'T...you need to take a sabatical from "law", and go back to doing what you probably do best: BE A FLIGHT ATTENDANT!
This short "blurb" from Wiki may help you:
"Authority to review
The authority of appellate courts to review a decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. For example, in the United States, both state and federal
appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether the court below made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were. Furthermore,
U.S. appellate courts are usually restricted to hearing appeals based on matters that were originally brought up before the trial court. Hence, such an appellate court will not consider an appellant's argument if it is based on a theory that is raised for the first time in the appeal.
In most U.S. states, and in U.S. federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as of right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring an appeal to contest that outcome. However,
appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict. Therefore,
only a small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals.
Some appellate courts,
particularly supreme courts,
have the power of discretionary review, meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeals_court
"The west is coming." Possibly..just a bit prematurely?
