Taniguchi v. Schultz

Ninth Circuit

Taniguchi v. Schultz

332 F.3d 1205, 2003 WL 21397730

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided June 18, 2003·No. Nos. 00-16928, 00-71053·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

Order; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The panel has voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judge Thomas has voted to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc and Judges Roney and Hug have 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 banc consideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied.

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

Order; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The panel has voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judge Thomas has voted to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc and Judges Roney and Hug have 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 banc consideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied.

Taniguchi v. Schultz, 332 F.3d 1205, 2003 WL 21397730 (9th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

332 F.3d 1205 (Taniguchi v. Schultz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related