Plumlee v. Masto

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Plumlee v. Masto. Read the opinion of the Court — 512 F.3d 1204
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 10, 2007·No. 04-15101·Published

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LARY JAMES PLUMLEE,  Petitioner-Appellant, No. 04-15101 v. D.C. No.

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,  CV-00-00244- Attorney General State of Nevada; DWH/VPC E.K. MCDANIEL, ORDER Respondents-Appellees.

Filed August 10, 2007

Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Chief Judge.

ORDER

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court,1 it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The threejudge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.

1 Judge Rawlinson is recused.

PRINTED FOR

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.

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

Plumlee v. Masto, (9th Cir. 2007).

Plumlee v. Masto (Plumlee v. Masto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.