Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. Homeland Security

Ninth Circuit

Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. Homeland Security

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 29, 2017

Docket14-16161

StatusPublished

This text of Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. Homeland Security (Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. Homeland Security) 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.

Bluebook

Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. Homeland Security, (9th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 29 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAHINAH IBRAHIM, an individual, Nos. 14-16161 14-17272 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:06-cv-00545-WHA v. Northern District of California, San Francisco U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; TERRORIST SCREENING ORDER CENTER; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; CHRISTOPHER A. WRAY, in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, in his official capacity as Attorney General; CHARLES H. KABLE IV, Director, in his official capacity as Director of the Terrorist Screening Center; CARL GHATTAS, in his official capacity as Executive Assistant Director of the FBI's National Security Branch; NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER; RUSSELL "RUSS" TRAVERS, in his official capacity as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center; DEPARTMENT OF STATE; REX W. TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants-Appellees. THOMAS, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that

these cases be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition in these cases shall

not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

Judges Graber, Murguia, Owens, and Friedland did not participate in the

deliberations or vote in these cases.

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

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 29 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAHINAH IBRAHIM, an individual, Nos. 14-16161 14-17272 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:06-cv-00545-WHA v. Northern District of California, San Francisco U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; TERRORIST SCREENING ORDER CENTER; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; CHRISTOPHER A. WRAY, in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, in his official capacity as Attorney General; CHARLES H. KABLE IV, Director, in his official capacity as Director of the Terrorist Screening Center; CARL GHATTAS, in his official capacity as Executive Assistant Director of the FBI's National Security Branch; NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER; RUSSELL "RUSS" TRAVERS, in his official capacity as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center; DEPARTMENT OF STATE; REX W. TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants-Appellees. THOMAS, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that

these cases be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition in these cases shall

not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

Judges Graber, Murguia, Owens, and Friedland did not participate in the

deliberations or vote in these cases.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. Homeland Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rahinah-ibrahim-v-us-dept-homeland-security-ca9-2017.