FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8669752
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Burkett v. Astrue

No. 8669752 · Decided April 22, 2008
No. 8669752 · Ninth Circuit · 2008 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 22, 2008
Citation
No. 8669752
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and the response to this court’s January 11, 2008 order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). It does not appear that the district court erred in denying appellant’s motion for an agency hearing where the requested hearing had already occurred. See Weeks v. Bayer, 246 F.3d 1231, 1234 (9th Cir.2001) (stating standard of review of a district court’s denial of a motion to reopen a judgment). Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s judgment. All pending motions and requests are denied as moot. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and the response to this court’s January 11, 2008 order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and the response to this court’s January 11, 2008 order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Burkett v. Astrue in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 22, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8669752 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →