United States v. Pervaz

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[plaintiff]’s complaint is invalid on its face in its 4 reliance upon § 1983 as a cause of action against federal government actors”
• “The rule does not provide a vehicle for a party to undo its own procedural failures, and it certainly does not allow a party to introduce new evidence or advance arguments that could and should have been presented to the district court prior to the judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).