Sarei v. Rio Tinto, Plc
This text of Sarei v. Rio Tinto, Plc (Sarei v. Rio Tinto, Plc) 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.
Opinion
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALEXIS HOLYWEEK SAREI; PAUL E. No. 02-56256 NERAU ; THOMAS TAMUASI; PHILLIP MIRIORI; GREGORY KOPA ; D.C. No. METHODIUS NESIKO ; ALOYSIUS 2:00-cv-11695- MOSES; RAPHEAL NINIKU ; GABRIEL MMM-MAN TAREASI; LINUS TAKINU ; LEO WUIS; MICHAEL AKOPE; BENEDICT PISI; Central District THOMAS KOBUKO ; JOHN TAMUASI; of California, NORMAN MOUVO ; JOHN OSANI; BEN Los Angeles KORUS; NAMIRA KAWONA ; JOANNE BOSCO ; JOHN PIGOLO ; MAGDALENE PIGOLO , individually and on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
RIO TINTO , PLC; RIO TINTO LIMITED , Defendants-Appellees. 2 SAREI V . RIO TINTO , PLC
ALEXIS HOLYWEEK SAREI; PAUL E. No. 02-56390 NERAU ; THOMAS TAMUASI; PHILLIP MIRIORI; GREGORY KOPA ; D.C. No. METHODIUS NESIKO ; ALOYSIUS 2:00-cv-11695- MOSES; RAPHEAL NINIKU ; GABRIEL MMM-MAN TAREASI; LINUS TAKINU ; LEO WUIS; MICHAEL AKOPE; BENEDICT PISI; Central District THOMAS KOBUKO ; JOHN TAMUASI; of California, NORMAN MOUVO ; JOHN OSANI; BEN Los Angeles KORUS; NAMIRA KAWONA ; JOANNE BOSCO ; JOHN PIGOLO ; MAGDALENE PIGOLO , individually and on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
RIO TINTO , PLC; RIO TINTO LIMITED , Defendants-Appellants. SAREI V . RIO TINTO , PLC 3
ALEXIS HOLYWEEK SAREI; PAUL E. No. 09-56381 NERAU ; THOMAS TAMUASI; PHILLIP MIRIORI; GREGORY KOPA ; D.C. No. METHODIUS NESIKO ; ALOYSIUS 2:00-cv-11695- MOSES; RAPHEAL NINIKU ; GARBIEL MMM-MAN TAREASI; LINUS TAKINU ; LEO WUIS; MICHAEL AKOPE; BENEDICT PISI; Central District THOMAS KOBUKO ; JOHN TAMUASI; of California, NORMAN MOUVO ; JOHN OSANI; BEN Los Angeles KORUS; NAMIRA KAWONA ; JOANNE BOSCO ; JOHN PIGOLO ; MAGDALENE PIGOLO , individually on behalf of ORDER themselves & all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
RIO TINTO , PLC; RIO TINTO LIMITED , Defendants-Appellants,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Movant. 4 SAREI V . RIO TINTO , PLC
On Remand From The United States Supreme Court
Filed June 28, 2013
Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Harry Pregerson, Stephen Reinhardt, Andrew J. Kleinfeld, Barry G. Silverman, M. Margaret McKeown, Marsha S. Berzon, Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Consuelo M. Callahan, Carlos T. Bea, and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
This case is before us after the Supreme Court’s order of April 22, 2013, vacating and remanding on the basis of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S. Ct. 1659 (2013). The parties have submitted supplemental briefs on the effect of that decision.
Upon due consideration, a majority of the en banc court has voted to affirm the district court’s judgment of dismissal with prejudice. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sarei v. Rio Tinto, Plc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sarei-v-rio-tinto-plc-ca9-2013.