Appellate Case: 23-4141 Document: 010111072184 Date Filed: 06/28/2024 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT June 28, 2024 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court W. CLARK APOSHIAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. No. 23-4141 (D.C. No. 2:19-CV-00037-JNP) MERRICK GARLAND, Attorney General (D. Utah) of the United States of America; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; STEVEN M. DETTELBACH, Director, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives; BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ The court previously abated this appeal pending the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Garland v. Cargill, No. 22-976. This matter is now before us on the parties’ Joint Abated Case Status Report, in which they report that the Supreme Court has

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Further, because this matter is being decided on a Joint Abated Case Status Report, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of the appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case therefore is ordered submitted without oral argument.

Appellate Case: 23-4141 Document: 010111072184 Date Filed: 06/28/2024 Page: 2

decided Cargill. See Garland v. Cargill, No. 22-976, 2024 U.S. LEXIS 2607 (June 14, 2024). In light of the Supreme Court’s decision, the parties ask us to “vacate the district court’s judgment in the government’s favor and remand for the district court to enter a new judgment in plaintiff’s favor and issue [other] appropriate relief.”

Upon consideration, we first lift the abatement of this appeal. Additionally, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Cargill, we vacate the judgment entered by the district court on September 29, 2023. Finally, we remand this matter to the district court, with instructions for the district court to conduct any and all further proceedings it deems necessary and appropriate in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Cargill. We direct the Clerk to issue the mandate forthwith.

Entered for the Court

CHRISTOPHER M. WOLPERT, Clerk