Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc.

Ninth Circuit

Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc.

788 F.3d 946, 2015 WL 3407226

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 6, 2015

DocketNo. 10-56739

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 788 F.3d 946 (Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc.) 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

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

Pincite

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