Sprint Telephony PCS, LP v. County of San Diego
This text of 527 F.3d 791 (Sprint Telephony PCS, LP v. County of San Diego) 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
SPRINT TELEPHONY PCS, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, and
Pacific Bell Wireless LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, dba Cingular Wireless, Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; Greg Cox, in his capacity as supervisor of the County of San Diego; Dianne Jacob, in her capacity as supervisor of the County of San Diego; Pam Slater, in her capacity as supervisor of the County of San Diego; Ron Roberts, in his capacity as supervisor of the County of San Diego; Bill Horn, in his capacity as supervisor of the County of San Diego, Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Daniel T. Pascucci, Nathan R. Hamler, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo, P.C., San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee.
Thomas D. Bunton, County of San Diego Office of County Counsel, John Sansome, Office of County Counsel, San Diego, CA, for Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants.
D.C. No. CV-03-1398-BTM.
ORDER
KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused *792 active judges,[1] it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.
NOTES
[1] Judges McKeown and M. Smith are recused.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
527 F.3d 791, 2008 WL 2051371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sprint-telephony-pcs-lp-v-county-of-san-diego-ca9-2008.