No. 25-432October Term 2025DismissedUpdated Sep 2, 2026
Carl Ellen Puckett, Jr., et ux. v. Ain Jeem
Carl Ellen Puckett, Jr., et ux. v. Ain Jeem, Inc.
The petition challenged the validity of a Sixth Circuit panel’s decision, arguing that a judge’s appointment or commission may have been invalid because President Biden allegedly used an autopen without properly documented authorization.
Case status
- Current stage
- Dismissed
- Latest event
- Dismissed
- Next
- Argument not yet scheduledArgument expected next term.
- What it's about
The petition challenged the validity of a Sixth Circuit panel’s decision, arguing that a judge’s appointment or commission may have been invalid because President Biden allegedly used an autopen without properly documented authorization. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition without deciding those claims.
Question presented
1. Whether in the absence of clear informed consent by President Biden for use of the auto pen for his signature on judicial nominations and commissions, including the Panel Judge Bloomkatz render them null and void and constitute an improper quorum? 2. Whether President Biden ’ s delegated use of the auto pen for his signature must clearly be based upon informed consent and specifically identify the individual to which the duty is delegated as discussed in the Scalia and Rhinequist memorandum (Appendix H Vol I p. 64), and be properly documented and recorded in the Federal Registry in accordance with 3 U.S.C. 301, regarding judicial nomi.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit / Dismissed
- Area
Dismissed Supreme Court case
Briefing
What it's about
The petition questions whether President Biden's use of an autopen to sign judicial nominations and commissions was properly authorized. It argues that, if a commission for Judge Bloomkatz was invalid, an appellate panel including that judge may not have been properly formed.
Argument
Oral argument has not been scheduled. The petition argues that autopen use for judicial commissions required clear, documented presidential authorization and that an invalid commission could create an improper appellate-panel quorum.
Impact
The dispute could affect litigants who seek to challenge appellate decisions based on the appointment of a judge on the panel. For example, a party that lost in the Sixth Circuit could argue that its case should be reconsidered if the panel was improperly formed.
What's next
No decision window is set. The next development would be a scheduling move or other action by the Court before any oral argument.
What is at stake in Puckett v. Ain Jeem?
The petition challenges whether autopen-signed judicial commissions were valid. It says an invalid commission could mean an appellate panel was improperly formed.
Who could be affected by the autopen challenge?
Litigants whose appeals were decided by a panel including the judge identified in the petition could seek to challenge that panel's authority.
When will the Supreme Court act in Puckett v. Ain Jeem?
No oral argument is scheduled and no decision window is set. Watch for a scheduling order or another Court action.
Documents
Activity
Docket activity2
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Sep 2, 2026 | Generated
Brief added: Petition
Aug 23, 2025 | Court records
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Sep 2, 2026
- Method
- Methodology