Jane Doe v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JANE DOE, No. 22-16562

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:19-cv- 03310-JSC v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; ORDER RASIER, LLC; RASIER CA, LLC,

Defendants-Appellees.

Filed January 13, 2025

Before: Susan P. Graber, Richard A. Paez, and Michelle T. Friedland, Circuit Judges.

Order 2 DOE V. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

ORDER

The majority memorandum disposition filed on August 8, 2024, is hereby amended. The dissent has not been amended. The amended memorandum will be filed and the dissent re-filed concurrently with this order. With the filing of the amended memorandum, the petition for panel rehearing (Dkt. 87) is DENIED. Judge Graber voted to grant the petition. A judge of the court requested a vote on en banc rehearing. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc rehearing. Fed. R. App. P. 40(c). Judges Gould, Miller, and VanDyke did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case. Appellees’ petition for rehearing en banc (Dkt. 87) is thus DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing shall be filed.