Michael Cuero v. Matthew Cate
This text of 850 F.3d 1019 (Michael Cuero v. Matthew Cate) 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.
Opinions
Concurrence by Judge WARDLAW;
Dissent by Judge CALLAHAN
ORDER
Judges Silverman1 and Wardlaw have voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. Judge [1020]*1020O’Scannlain has voted to grant the petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc.
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.
The petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
850 F.3d 1019, 2017 WL 908239, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4078, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-cuero-v-matthew-cate-ca9-2017.