The appeals court in Washington dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought by a Marine who led the squad in the attack. The judges agreed with Murtha that he was immune from the lawsuit because he was acting in his official role as a lawmaker when he made the comments to reporters.

Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich of Meriden, Conn., claimed Murtha damaged his reputation by saying the squad he was leading engaged in "cold-blooded murder and war crimes" in Haditha, Iraq, on Nov. 19, 2005.

At a Capitol Hill news conference in May 2006, Murtha predicted that a Pentagon war crimes investigation would show the Marines killed dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians in Haditha.

Military prosecutors have said two dozen Iraqis, including women and children, were killed in Haditha after one Marine died and two others were wounded by a roadside bomb. Wuterich is charged with voluntary manslaughter and other allegations, the only person still facing charges in the attack.

He has pleaded not guilty. He is accused of ordering his men to clear several houses with grenades and gunfire, leading to the civilian deaths.

Gatlin had sued those groups in federal court, saying his rights were violated under the Americans with Disabilities Act. He said he was discriminated against because his first of two doping violations, in 2001, was for taking prescribed medication to treat attention deficit disorder.

Because that penalty was on the books, his second violation, in 2006, triggered a suspension that kept him from defending his 2004 Olympic gold medal at the Beijing Games. In June 2008, the Court of Arbitration for Sport rejected Gatlin's appeal of his doping ban, and he took the matter to U.S. court.

Both USADA CEO Travis Tygart and USOC spokesman Darryl Seibel said Wednesday their groups would not enter into an agreement that would undermine the decision by CAS.

"The parties are actively engaged in discussions regarding a final, formal, out-of-court resolution of this matter, which we believe may soon be reached," Seibel wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

The civil clerk for the federal court in Pensacola said the case is considered closed but is still under the court's jurisdiction until May 10. The court is waiting for the attorneys to file final paperwork stating the case is completely closed under the terms of the agreement.

"The settlement documents are not final," Gatlin's lawyer, Joe Zarzaur, wrote the AP.

U.S. District Court Judge Lacey Collier issued an order in February dismissing the case after Gatlin informed the court there was a settlement.

Anti-abortion groups have won approval in at least 18 states for specialized license plates with the tagline "Choose Life," even as officials in New Jersey and other states fight the requests on various grounds.

The cases raise unresolved questions about whether license plates — or even portions of them — convey government or private speech. To raise revenues, many states let drivers buy specialty plates that recognize everything from military units and colleges to sports teams and nonprofit groups.

"Legislatures can say there might be certain controversies they do not want discussed on license plates," Assistant New Jersey Attorney General Andrea Silkowitz argued Tuesday in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court, referring to an Illinois case.

Silkowitz argued that her state rejected the "Choose Life" plate not to avoid controversy but because the relevant law limits designs to group names and logos, and does not permit slogans.

In 2003, the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission approved a request from the New York-based Children First Foundation, but later rejected the proposed design, which included a small graphic of a sun, two children's faces and the words "Choose Life."

The New Jersey agency also dismissed a later attempt to substitute a new domain name, "NJChoose-Life.Org," for the original "Fund-Adoption.Org" on the plate.

But economists expect that trend to moderate soon, as businesses bring inventories in line with slower sales. That should allow production to decline at a slower pace in the current quarter.

Still, the drop in March was steeper than expected. The Federal Reserve said production at the nation's factories, mines and utilities dropped a seasonally adjusted 1.5 percent, matching February's decline and worse than the 1 percent decline analysts forecast.

Factories and mines are increasingly idle, as the total industrial capacity utilization rate fell to 69.3 percent from 70.3 percent, the lowest on records dating to 1967.

Industrial production fell at a 20 percent annual rate in the first quarter, the Fed said, the sharpest quarterly downturn of the current recession. The drop will contribute to another steep contraction in the overall economy in the January-March period that economists estimate will be in the 4 to 5 percent range. The nation's economy shrank 6.3 percent in the fourth quarter of last year.

Some analysts expect industrial production to fall at a rate of less than 10 percent in the current quarter, as the economy's contraction slows.

Instead, Kagan, confirmed by the Senate last month as solicitor general, will wait until the fall to make her debut, Justice Department spokeswoman Beverley Lumpkin said Tuesday.

By the time Kagan took up her post, Lumpkin said, most of the cases the court will hear in April already had been assigned.

"I suppose she could have spent the last several weeks doing nothing but preparing, but that's not something she wanted to do. There's a lot to do getting up to speed in the office," Lumpkin said.

The solicitor general typically handles the top cases before the court. The challenge to a provision of the Voting Rights Act, which will be argued April 29, is perhaps this term's highest-profile case.

Kagan has a most impressive resume — former Harvard Law School dean, Clinton White House official and Supreme Court clerk — but she has little courtroom experience.

A Manhattan judge cleared the way for the newly filed Chapter 7 petition last week by granting a request from the same investors to lift a temporary order barring bankruptcy for Madoff. They had argued that a bankruptcy case was needed to protect their rights amid an ongoing scramble to seize his assets.

Madoff, 70, pleaded guilty last month to federal charges his secretive investment advisory service actually was a multibillion Ponzi scheme in which he paid longtime clients with money from new ones. He is jailed, awaiting a June sentencing for charges that carry a sentence of up to 150 years in prison.

Federal authorities already have begun forcing Madoff to forfeit property they allege was paid for by his fraud. In addition, a court-appointed trustee is liquidating assets from his securities firm to help play claims from thousands of burned investors.

The investors who sought bankruptcy believe it was the best way to make sure "all the property available would go to the victims," their lawyer, Jonathan Landers, said Monday.

They include a general partnership in Florida that claims it lost $30.2 million and another Madoff client who says he lost about $29 million in personal and charitable trust accounts. The claims are based on amounts listed in the last statements they received from Madoff — documents investigators say were fictitious.

His lawyers filed an emergency appeal with Justice Stephen Breyer after the federal appeals court in Denver turned down Nachio's latest bid to stay out of prison while he asks the high court to review his conviction in 2007 involving the sale of $52 million worth of stock in Qwest Communications International Inc.

Nacchio has been ordered to report to a prison camp in Minersville, Pa., by noon Tuesday to start a six-year term.

He says he should be allowed to remain free pending the Supreme Court's consideration of his case because there is a reasonable chance the justices will agree to consider overturning the conviction.

Federal prosecutors have opposed Nacchio's request.

They have said Nacchio hasn't met the requirement of showing that his Supreme Court appeal would probably win him a new trial or acquittal.