`
`NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
`
`United States Court of Appeals
`for the Federal Circuit
`______________________
`
`FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC., ACADIA INSURANCE
`COMPANY, ADMIRAL INDEMNITY COMPANY,
`ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKLEY
`INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKLEY REGIONAL
`INSURANCE COMPANY, CAROLINA CASUALTY
`INSURANCE COMPANY, CONTINENTAL
`WESTERN INSURANCE COMPANY, MIDWEST
`EMPLOYERS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
`NAUTILUS INSURANCE COMPANY, PREFERRED
`EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, THE
`FAIRHOLME FUND, ANDREW T. BARRETT,
`Plaintiffs-Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`UNITED STATES,
`Defendant-Respondent
`______________________
`
`2020-121
`______________________
`
`On Petition for Permission to Appeal pursuant to 28
`U.S.C. Section 1292(d) from the United States Court of
`Federal Claims in No. 1:13-cv-00465-MMS, Chief Judge
`Margaret M. Sweeney.
`- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case: 20-121 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 06/18/2020
`
`2
`
`
`
`FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC. v. US
`
`FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC., ACADIA INSURANCE
`COMPANY, ADMIRAL INDEMNITY COMPANY,
`ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKLEY
`INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKLEY REGIONAL
`INSURANCE COMPANY, CAROLINA CASUALTY
`INSURANCE COMPANY, CONTINENTAL
`WESTERN INSURANCE COMPANY, MIDWEST
`EMPLOYERS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
`NAUTILUS INSURANCE COMPANY, PREFERRED
`EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, THE
`FAIRHOLME FUND, ANDREW T. BARRETT,
`Plaintiffs-Respondents
`
`v.
`
`UNITED STATES,
`Defendant-Petitioner
`______________________
`
`2020-122
`______________________
`
`On Petition for Permission to Appeal pursuant to 28
`U.S.C. Section 1292(d) from the United States Court of
`Federal Claims in No. 1:13-cv-00465-MMS, Chief Judge
`Margaret M. Sweeney.
`______________________
`
`ON PETITION
`______________________
`
`Before O’MALLEY, WALLACH, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
`
`
`STOLL, Circuit Judge.
`
`O R D E R
`Fairholme Funds, Inc. et al. (collectively, “Fairholme”)
`
`and the United States separately petition pursuant to 28
`
`
`
`Case: 20-121 Document: 18 Page: 3 Filed: 06/18/2020
`
`FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC. v. US
`
` 3
`
`U.S.C. § 1292(d)(2) to appeal the interlocutory order certi-
`fied by the United States Court of Federal Claims. Both
`petitions are unopposed. Owl Creek Asia I, L.P. et al.; Ap-
`paloosa Investment Limited Partnership I et al.; Akanthos
`Opportunity Fund, L.P.; CSS, LLC; and Mason Capital
`L.P. et al. (collectively, “Owl Creek”) move for leave to file
`a brief amici curiae in support of neither party.
`
`This court determines for itself whether it will grant
`permission to appeal an interlocutory order certified by a
`trial court. See In re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Patent
`Litig., 903 F.2d 822, 822 (Fed. Cir. 1990). We agree with
`the Claims Court and the parties that at least one of the
`issues raised by the certified order appears to satisfy the
`criteria set forth in § 1292(d) and warrants immediate re-
`view. We deem it proper to grant both petitions, leaving it
`ultimately up to the merits panel to decide what issues are
`appropriate to address on interlocutory appeal.
`Accordingly,
`IT IS ORDERED THAT:
`
`(1) The petitions are granted. This case is transferred
`
`to the regular docket. The appeals will be consolidated.
`Fairholme’s appeal will be designated as the lead appeal,
`and the government’s appeal will be designated as a cross-
`appeal. Fairholme’s opening brief is due within 60 days of
`the date of filing of this order.
`
`(2) Owl Creek’s motion is granted to the extent that
`the amicus brief is accepted for filing. Any request for fur-
`ther relief from the court should be made after docketing.
`
`FOR THE COURT
`
`
`June 18, 2020
`/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
`Date
`Peter R. Marksteiner
`Clerk of Court
`
`s28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
