# Reply Brief — Camp v. Rumsfeld > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385003_1478%3A4 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Reply Brief - **Published:** January 1, 1976 - **Citation:** 424 U.S. 914 ## Text Bupreme Court, U.S & EILED#é_ | No._ 75-888 FEB 10 1975 eh In The Supreme Court of The United States OCTOBER TERM, 1975 JAMES H. CAMP, et al., Petitioners, v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, et al., Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ey ee REPLY TO RESPONDENTS’ MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION LAW OFFICES OF FREDERICK HETTER 2214 Fifth Avenue San Diego, California 92101 Telephone: (714) 239-8185 Attorneys for Petitioners Interim Printing & Mailing Company, 3191 Adams Avenue, San Diego, California 92116 — 283-7282 SRST eT NONE REE. I, Sp ERE. ow a TABLE OF CONTENTS REASONS WHY EXTENSION OF TIME PRE scneeeccoveseeceves GENO couduncccccecseseccedéstecci TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CITED CASES Aero Mayflower Transit, Inc. v. United States, 409 U.S. 905-907 (1972) ........... Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481 (1971) .. Georgia Lumber Co. v. Compania, BaP OD. BOO CTPUED ccccwececwceces Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S. DEORE » v Se ERIM PRWTWS lem BO - [TE “vo fe ONSGNEE) =. cate aes Mcrae Room Cree! U0 S SorREME Cover. COROT SD ms WASH/NSTcd DC, aca) na ‘ | SER wal ae =| coe es ei | Aaeee | —— meces OESCMP LON AnD Baees iia wasnt Gpeseene , ”. — Co — a eae / PRwTo MAT LCL a. £2 @ a ee ee Se es 1 ee oe ee Oe th ame OS BAS a ae oe on eel : we i -E> “at, “NST: “e | = ss a SPee a Dep 7 CAS _ saree aT rT} t |te—+-———- U cry = RIA AT / ry (OLS, a —— ee WC 2 a ] @n--« — cue