Puckett v. Reed

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “the need identified by plaintiffs is also not particularly pressing since the weight of the need hinges on plaintiffs’ assumption that the fee is unconstitutional, even though the Federal Circuit explicitly found otherwise”
• “Staying litigation in order to let plaintiffs have a second bite at the apple does not establish a compelling need.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).