Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Harry A. BURNETT, Plaintiff — Appellant, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Defendant — Appellee.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The facts of this case are known to the parties.

Unlike Boyd v. U.S. Postal Service, 752 F.2d 410 (9th Cir. 1985), the DEA litigated Burnett's claim for roughly seven years to a decision on the merits before the agency, and failed to affirmatively set forth statute of limitations as a defense in its first responsive pleading before the district court as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(c). As a result, we conclude that the Government waived its timeliness objection.

REVERSED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BURNETT v. MUKASEY
(Nov 27, 2007)