In United States v. Thompson (D.C. Cir. 1971) 452 F.2d 1333, the court discusses why a remand for further findings was necessary since the district judge's order denying bail "does no more than repeat the statutory standard contained in the Court Reform Act and state that the defendant has failed to meet it." The court held this recitation did not satisfy the requirements of rule 9(b) Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (28 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.S. Court Rules) requiring the court state in writing its reasons for the action taken. It held a mere parroting of the provisions of the applicable statute is not an adequate substitute for a full statement of reasons. It then quotes from Weaver v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1968) 405 F.2d 353, 354, "the District Judge should indicate not only which one or more of these reasons has prompted him to deny release, but should also delineate the basis for his utilization of such reason or reasons . . . . Only when these reasons are spelled out can an appellant intelligently renew his motion before this court; and only then can this court fairly review the merits."