Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc.

788 F.3d 946, 2015 WL 3407226
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided May 6, 2015·No. No. 10-56739·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinions

ORDER

Judge Rawlinson voted to grant the petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc.

Judge Nelson and Judge Wardlaw voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judge Wardlaw voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Nelson so recommended.

The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R. App. P. 35.

Judges Graber, Ikuta, Watford, Owens, and Friedland did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

Judge Bea’s dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc is filed concurrently with this order.

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

Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc., 788 F.3d 946, 2015 WL 3407226 (9th Cir. 2015).

788 F.3d 946 (Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe
593 U.S. 628 (Supreme Court, 2021)
John Doe v. Nestle, S.A.
929 F.3d 623 (Ninth Circuit, 2018)
Ramchandra Adhikari v. Daoud & Partners, et
845 F.3d 184 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)