Sprint Telephony Pcs v. County of San Diego

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

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. Nos. 05-56076 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; GREG COX, 05-56435 in his capacity as supervisor of the County of San Diego; DIANNE  D.C. No. CV-03-1398-BTM JACOB, in her capacity as supervisor of the County of San ORDER 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.  Filed May 14, 2008

5759 5760 SPRINT TELEPHONY PCS v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges,1 it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Cir- cuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

1 Judges McKeown and M. Smith are recused. PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West.