Bates v. UPS
This text of Bates v. UPS (Bates v. UPS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ERIC BATES; BERT ENOS; BABARANTI OLOYEDE; ERIC BUMBALA; EDWARD WILLIAMS, on behalf of themselves and all others No. 04-17295 similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. CV-99-02216-TEH v. ORDER UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., dba UPS, Defendant-Appellant. Filed April 24, 2007
Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Chief Judge.
ORDER
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court,1 it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three- judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.
1 Judge Wardlaw is recused.
4605 PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO
The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bates v. UPS, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-ups-ca9-2007.