Back in November, CAAF granted review in the Marine Corps case of United States v. Baas, No. 19-0377/MC (discussed here). The case involves the admission of a gonorrhea screening test and includes a Confrontation Clause challenge and a substantive challenge to the reliability of the test.
CAAF’s daily journal has this entry from Tuesday:
No. 19-0377/MC. U.S. v. Nicholas S. Baas. CCA 201700318. On consideration of Appellee’s motion to return or strike Appellant’s brief for non-compliance with this Court’s rules, it is ordered that the motion is granted in part, regarding Appellant’s citation to the Diatherix manual found on pages 10, 11, 12, and 51 of his brief, that the motion is denied in part, regarding Appellant’s citation to Thinking, Fast and Slow, and the brief is returned to Appellant to refile a brief that complies with this Order on or before February 5, 2020.
I can’t recall any other example of CAAF rejecting a brief from an individual appellant, and certainly not on motion of a Government division.