Rivera v. NIBCO, Inc.

384 F.3d 822, 2004 WL 2086268
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 20, 2004·No. No. 02-16532·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinions

BEA, Circuit Judge,

with whom Circuit Judges KOZINSKI, KLEINFELD and GOULD join,

dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc:

ORDER

Judges Reinhardt, Siler and Hawkins voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judges Reinhardt and Hawkins voted to [823] deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Siler 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 bane reconsideration. Fed. R. App. P. 35.

The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en bane are denied.

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

Rivera v. NIBCO, Inc., 384 F.3d 822, 2004 WL 2086268 (9th Cir. 2004).

384 F.3d 822 (Rivera v. NIBCO, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Andino v. Apple, Inc.
E.D. California, 2024
EpicentRx, Inc. v. Carter
S.D. California, 2020
Elmer Lucas v. Jerusalem Cafe, LLC
721 F.3d 927 (Eighth Circuit, 2013)
Wade v. City of Fruitland
287 F.R.D. 638 (D. Idaho, 2013)
Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky
251 F.R.D. 573 (W.D. Washington, 2008)
Rosa v. Partners in Progress, Inc.
868 A.2d 994 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 2005)
Rivera v. Nibco, Inc.
384 F.3d 822 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)