This suggests that the scales now tip against granting the en banc petition in Young v. Hawaii.  After all, the en banc hearing in Peruta v. San Diego involved two appeals, the NRA's Peruta concealed carry appeal and the SAF's/CalGuns.nuts concealed carry appeal in Richards v. Prieto.  If Young v. Hawaii is going to go en banc then why not grant the petition?

On September 24, 2018, the State of California filed a petition for the NRA's Fake Open Carry appeal, Flanagan v. Becerra, to be initially heard before an en banc panel.  Had it been granted then the Flanagan appeal would have leap-frogged over my appeal.  The NRA's position on the petition was that it supported the petition if it were granted and opposed the petition if it were denied.  I anxiously await to see how the NRA spins the denial of the petition into a victory.

No judge requested a vote on the petition.  Check today's update at my website -> https://californiaopencarry.com/status-of-my-federal-open-carry-lawsuit/

Is the time involved (decades) with these kind of cases typical or is it intentional delay by the judges?

It seems that a case taking a generation to be resolved is intentional.   The national flood on antigun bills in multiple states seem to be intentional even if legal or not because they wont make it to the supreme court in anyone's lifetime anyway.

Is the time involved (decades) with these kind of cases typical or is it intentional delay by the judges?

It seems that a case taking a generation to be resolved is intentional.   The national flood on antigun bills in multiple states seem to be intentional even if legal or not because they wont make it to the supreme court in anyone's lifetime anyway.

"The wheels of justice turn slowly."

Maybe, yeah, but so slowly that you can't even tell if the ARE turning? 

Is the time involved (decades) with these kind of cases typical or is it intentional delay by the judges?

It seems that a case taking a generation to be resolved is intentional.   The national flood on antigun bills in multiple states seem to be intentional even if legal or not because they wont make it to the supreme court in anyone's lifetime anyway.

If you think the 9th circuit is bad, and it is, there is a case out of New York involving that state's ban on tying two sticks together (Nunchaku) which was filed in 2004 AND was reversed and remanded by SCOTUS back in 2010 in light of, and the day after, the McDonald decision was published.

So far, no 2A case has exceeded a decade in the 9th circuit.  The concealed carry case Rothery v. Blanas (cert denied) came close.  Some might point to the Nordyke case but for most of the time that case was live, it was a 1st Amendment case.  Nordyke v. King did not become a 2nd Amendment case until the Heller decision was handed down.

As far as I am aware, mine is the oldest 2nd Amendment carry case in the 9th circuit (or any circuit) and was filed in the district court on November 30, 2011 (six months or so ahead of Young v. Hawaii).

As far as I am aware, mine is the oldest 2nd Amendment case in the 9th circuit.