Pierce

Pierce v. County of Orange

Good Law
526 F.3d 1190·2008 WL 2052408
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 24, 200805-55829, 05-55845California18,257 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

ORDER

The opinion filed on March 24, 2008 and published at 519 F.3d 985 (9th Cir.2008), is AMENDED as follows:

(1) At 519 F.3d at 1016 , after the sentence ending, “with or without reasonable accommodations, meet the essential eligibility requirements to participate,” insert the following additional two sentences:

(2) At 519 F.3d at 1016 , delete the sentence reading, “In particular, the district court should examine the extent to which the programs offered at Theo Lacy and Musick are capable of reassignment to the Central Jail without eliminating those programs at Theo Lacy or Musick.” Replace the deleted sentence with the following three sentences:

Judges McKeown and Bybee have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Fletcher has so recommended. The petition for en banc rehearing has been circulated to the full court, and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35(b). The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be accepted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

OPINION

In 2001, plaintiffs-appellants Fred Pierce, Timothy Lee Conn, Fermín Valenzuela, and Laurie D.…

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.