Berger v. City of Seattle

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Berger v. City of Seattle. Read the opinion of the Court — 569 F.3d 1029
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 14, 2008·No. 05-35752·Published

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL JAMES BERGER, a single  man also known as Magic Mike, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF SEATTLE; VIRGINIA No. 05-35752 ANDERSON, Director of Seattle Center; MICHAEL ANDERSON,  D.C. No. CV-03-03238-JLR Emergency Service Manager for Seattle Center; TEN UNKNOWN ORDER EMPLOYEES/OFFICERS, of the Seattle Center and the City of Seattle, all in both their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellants.  Filed July 14, 2008

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

8901 PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Berger v. City of Seattle, (9th Cir. 2008).

Berger v. City of Seattle (Berger v. City of Seattle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.