Editor's Note :

Editor's Note :

In previous years, the Court released orders the morning after the Court’s “Long Conference.” It has not done so this year. Beginning last Term, the Court consistently considered petitions at least two times before granting certiorari. To the extent that practice continues -- and there is no affirmative evidence the Court intends to drop it -- we would not expect orders granting certiorari today.

City of Los Angeles v. Patel

Pending petition
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
13-1175 9th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as co-counsel to the respondent in this case.

Issue: (1) Whether facial challenges to ordinances and statutes are permitted under the Fourth Amendment; and (2) whether a hotel has an expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment in a hotel guest registry where the guest-supplied information is mandated by law and an ordinance authorizes the police to inspect the registry, and if so, whether the ordinance is facially unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment unless it expressly provides for pre-compliance judicial review before the police can inspect the registry.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders
Mar 24 2014Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 28, 2014)
Apr 25 2014Waiver of right of respondents Naranjibhai Patel, et al to respond filed.
May 6 2014DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 22, 2014.
May 19 2014Response Requested . (Due June 18, 2014)
May 28 2014Order extending time to file response to petition to and including July 18, 2014.
Jul 10 2014Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including August 18, 2014.
Aug 12 2014Brief of respondents Naranjibhai Patel, et al in opposition filed.
Aug 25 2014Reply of petitioner City of Los Angeles, California filed.
Aug 27 2014DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 29, 2014.
Term Snapshot