UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
HARRY LEON SMITH, III, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
HARRY LEON SMITH, III, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
112 F.3d 473
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1997)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT: A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on whether this case should be reheard by the Court sitting en bane, and a majority of the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en bane, IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel’s opinion is hereby VACATED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Smith, 127 F.3d 987 (11th Cir. 1997)…ional one-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(b). United States v. Smith, 106 F. 3d 350 (11th Cir.1997) (as amended). This court then vacated that decision and ordered rehearing en banc. United States v. Smith, 112 F. 3d 473 (11th Cir.1997). II. The determination of whether a defendant has adequately manifested acceptance of responsibility is a flexible, fact sensitive inquiry. See Joiner v. United States, 103 F. 3d 961, 963 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S…
-
ABP Patent Holding, LLC v. Convergent Label Tech., Inc., 194 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (M.D. Fla. 2002)…e of the claimed invention. Corning Glass Works v. Sumitomo Elec. U.S.A., Inc., 868 F.2d 1251, 1257 (Fed.Cir.1989); Bell Communications Research, Inc. v. Vitalink Communications Corp., 55 F.3d 615, 620 (Fed.Cir.1995); Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478-79 (Fed.Cir.1997); In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1479 (Fed.Cir.1994) (“[T]erms appearing in a preamble may be deemed limitations of a claim when they give meaning to the claim and properly define the invention.”). The prosecution histo…