Update: There May Be No Live Argument In The Ninth Cir.: Notice On Docket.

I’ve long said there are no remotely meritorious claims in Ms. Holmes’ appeal of her conviction. Same, Sunny Balwani’s.

Now the Ninth Circuit hints at much the same — suggesting while it might hear argument on June 10, it may also simply decide the appeal on the briefs alone. That is common in busy districts where no novel or particularly weighty issues are raised on an appeal, in a criminal case — like this one, despite the wall-to-wall, copious and generally very capable press coverage of the trials, and the aftermaths — as to both felons:

…NOTE: Although your case is currently scheduled for oral argument, the panel may decide to submit the case on the briefs instead. See Fed. R. App. P. 34. Absent further order of the court, if the court does determine that oral argument is required in this case, you are expected to appear in person at the Courthouse. If an in person appearance would pose a hardship, you must file a motion for permission to appear remotely by video, using the CM/ECF filing event “Motion for any relief (other than reconsideration or to seal)” and selecting the appropriate relief. Such a motion must be filed within 7 days of this notice, absent exigent circumstances. Everyone appearing in person must review and comply with our Protocols for In Person Hearings, available here. If the panel determines that it will hold oral argument in your case, the Clerk’s Office will contact you directly at least two weeks before the set argument date to review any requirements for in person appearance or to make any necessary arrangements for a remote appearance that has been approved or directed by the panel.

Please note however that if you do file a motion to appear remotely, the court strongly prefers video over telephone appearance. Therefore, if you wish to appear remotely by telephone you will need to justify that request in your motion and receive explicit permission to do so….