Elizabeth Haskell v. Kamala D. Harris
This text of Elizabeth Haskell v. Kamala D. Harris (Elizabeth Haskell v. Kamala D. Harris) 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
ELIZABETH AIDA HASKELL; REGINALD ENTO; JEFFREY PATRICK LYONS, JR.; AAKASH DESAI, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, No. 10-15152 Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. D.C. No. 3:09-cv-04779-CRB KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney ORDER General of California; EVA STEINBERGER, Assistant Bureau Chief for DNA Programs, California Department of Justice, Defendants-Appellees. Filed July 25, 2012
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 Fed. R. App. P. 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 Nguyen, Watford and Hurwitz did not participate in the deliberations or vote as to whether the case should be taken en banc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Elizabeth Haskell v. Kamala D. Harris, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elizabeth-haskell-v-kamala-d-harris-ca9-2012.