Musladin

Musladin v. Lamarque

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 20, 200503-16653California3,513 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MATHEW MUSLADIN,  No. 03-16653 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. CV-00-01998-JL ANTHONY LAMARQUE, WARDEN,  Northern District Respondent-Appellee. of California, San Francisco

 ORDER

Filed October 21, 2005

Before: Stephen Reinhardt, David R. Thompson, and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges.

Order; Dissent by Judge Kleinfeld; Dissent by Judge Bea

ORDER

The petition for panel rehearing is DENIED.

The full court was advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. A judge of the court 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 reconsideration. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The request for rehearing en banc is DENIED.

14417 14418 MUSLADIN v. LAMARQUE KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge, with whom KOZINSKI, O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, BYBEE, CALLAHAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges, join, dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc:

I respectfully dissent from the order denying rehearing en banc. We have…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.