Goldberg

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SQUAW VALLEY DEVELOPMENT 

COMPANY; SQUAW VALLEY SKI

CORPORATION; SQUAW VALLEY No. 02-17346 PRESERVE, D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellants,  CV 01-2031 WBS v. ED Cal.

MARTIN GOLDBERG; HAROLD ORDER

SINGER,

Defendants-Appellees.  Filed January 13, 2005

Before: A. Wallace Tashima and Richard R. Clifton, Circuit Judges, and Ronald B. Leighton,* District Judge.

ORDER

Defendant-Appellee Harold Singer petitions for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc. He argues, inter alia, that our decision permitting Squaw Valley to proceed on its “class of one” claim against Singer, see Squaw Valley Dev. Co. v. Goldberg, 375 F.3d 936, 944-48 (9th Cir. 2004) (“Squaw Val- ley I”), conflicts with Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 564 (2000), because Squaw Valley “failed to estab- lish that any other dischargers that were treated differently were ‘similarly situated’ ” to Squaw Valley. We reject the argument because it is made for the first time in Singer’s peti- tion for…