Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Loretta E. Lynch

Ninth Circuit

Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Loretta E. Lynch

835 F.3d 891, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10766, 2016 WL 3262628

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 14, 2016

Docket13-72682

StatusPublished

This text of 835 F.3d 891 (Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Loretta E. Lynch) 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.

Bluebook

Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Loretta E. Lynch, 835 F.3d 891, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10766, 2016 WL 3262628 (9th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

THOMAS, Chief Judge:

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

Judges McKeown and Watford did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

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

ORDER

THOMAS, Chief Judge:

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

Judges McKeown and Watford did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

835 F.3d 891, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10766, 2016 WL 3262628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlos-bringas-rodriguez-v-loretta-e-lynch-ca9-2016.