Home/Ninth Circuit/Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc.

Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc.

554 F.3d 769, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 2259, 2009 WL 224544
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided January 27, 2009·No. 07-55282·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinions

Order; Concurrence by Judge WARDLAW; Dissent by Judge IKUTA.

ORDER

Judges Pregerson, Wardlaw, and Leigh-ton voted to deny Appellees’ petition for panel rehearing. Judges Pregerson and Wardlaw also voted to deny Appellees’ petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Leighton 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 reconsideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35. Judge Bybee was re-cused.

The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.

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

Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc., 554 F.3d 769, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 2259, 2009 WL 224544 (9th Cir. 2009).

554 F.3d 769 (Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Kevin Nessland
601 F. App'x 576 (Ninth Circuit, 2015)
City of Ontario v. Quon
560 U.S. 746 (Supreme Court, 2010)
State v. Bellar
217 P.3d 1094 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2009)
Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc.
973 A.2d 390 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2009)
Lopez v. Youngblood
609 F. Supp. 2d 1125 (E.D. California, 2009)
Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc.
554 F.3d 769 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)