Steven Fue v. Martin Biter

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Steven Fue v. Martin Biter. Read the opinion of the Court — 842 F.3d 650
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 4, 2016·No. 12-55307·Published

Opinion

FILED FOR PUBLICATION AUG 04 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STEVEN PELESASA FUE, No. 12-55307

Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-02436-DMG-MRW v. Central District of California, Los Angeles MARTIN BITER, Warden,

Respondent-Appellee. ORDER

THOMAS, Chief Judge:

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

this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a)

and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as

precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

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

Steven Fue v. Martin Biter, (9th Cir. 2016).

Steven Fue v. Martin Biter (Steven Fue v. Martin Biter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.