Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
David Paitsel v. United States
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 23-3212 · judgment August 1, 2025
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
In McDonnell v. United States, 579 U.S. 550 (2016), this Court set very clear prosecutorial and judicial standards in criminal proceedings involving bribery associated with an official act. The D.C. Circuit, in its precedential ruling in United States v. Paitsel, 147 F.4th 1010 (CADC 2025), ignored those standards set forth in McDonnell by this Court and therefore created very ambiguous boundaries in this type of matter. Did the D.C. Circuit err and therefore set forth a dangerous precedent? Did the D.C. Circuit, through its errors, thereby create a judicial crisis and a dangerous situation within the D.C. Circuit, in addition to a negative influence upon other United States courts of appeals?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Louis Elias Lopez Jr.
Law Office of Louis E. Lopez Jr.
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage
Proceedings
- Dec 15 2025Petition DENIED.
- Dec 01 2025Brief amicus curiae of Huang Tiange filed. (Distributed)
- Nov 25 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/12/2025.
- Nov 18 2025Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Nov 06 2025proof of service of David Paitsel not accepted for filing. (November 19, 2025)
- Nov 06 2025(November 19, 2025)
- Oct 29 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 1, 2025)