I think I've just caught the government lying in its brief opposing en banc reconsideration in the Flynn case. Their arg on p.15 is to a supposed 1996 amendment to FRAP 35(b) that DOES NOT EXIST. It DID NOT HAPPEN. (The FRAP 21(a) cite is also bogus.) Pls share; links follow. 
The government's brief is available here -- turn to page 15 and see for yourself: documentcloud.org/documents/6998…
And FRAP 35 is available here -- you'll see there was no "1996 Note" because there was NO 1996 Amendment! law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rul…
And FRAP 35 is available here -- you'll see there was no "1996 Note" because there was NO 1996 Amendment! law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rul…
Also FRAP 21 doesn't say what they say it does. law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rul…
Unlike FRAP 35 (which was NOT amended in 1996), FRAP 21 was... but that amendment was one of "tone" only to change the way these cases are captioned, not substantively -- i.e., the opposite of what the gov't is arguing: law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rul…
