Uhm v. Humana Inc

Ninth Circuit

Uhm v. Humana Inc

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJuly 22, 2009

Docket06-35672

StatusPublished

This text of Uhm v. Humana Inc (Uhm v. Humana Inc) 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.

Bluebook

Uhm v. Humana Inc, (9th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DO SUNG UHM; EUN SOOK UHM, a  married couple, individually and No. 06-35672 for all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. CV-06-00185-RSM v.  Western District of HUMANA INC., a Delaware Washington, corporation; HUMANA HEALTH PLAN Seattle INC., a Kentucky corporation doing ORDER business as Humana, Defendants-Appellees.  Filed July 22, 2009

Before: Betty B. Fletcher, Richard A. Paez and Marsha S. Berzon,* Circuit Judges. ORDER

Appellees’ request for reconsideration shall be treated as a petition for panel rehearing and is GRANTED. The opinion filed on August 25, 2008 and reported at 540 F.3d 980 (9th Cir. 2008) is WITHDRAWN and shall not be cited as prece- dent. The petition for rehearing en banc is moot. The panel will file a new disposition in due course.

*Due to the unavailability of Senior District Judge William Schwarzer, Judge Berzon has been randomly drawn as a replacement judge.

9381 PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

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

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DO SUNG UHM; EUN SOOK UHM, a  married couple, individually and No. 06-35672 for all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. CV-06-00185-RSM v.  Western District of HUMANA INC., a Delaware Washington, corporation; HUMANA HEALTH PLAN Seattle INC., a Kentucky corporation doing ORDER business as Humana, Defendants-Appellees.  Filed July 22, 2009

Before: Betty B. Fletcher, Richard A. Paez and Marsha S. Berzon,* Circuit Judges. ORDER

Appellees’ request for reconsideration shall be treated as a petition for panel rehearing and is GRANTED. The opinion filed on August 25, 2008 and reported at 540 F.3d 980 (9th Cir. 2008) is WITHDRAWN and shall not be cited as prece- dent. The petition for rehearing en banc is moot. The panel will file a new disposition in due course.

*Due to the unavailability of Senior District Judge William Schwarzer, Judge Berzon has been randomly drawn as a replacement judge.

9381 PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Uhm v. Humana Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/uhm-v-humana-inc-ca9-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack