Dukes

Dukes v. Wal-Mart, Inc.

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 13, 200904-16688California169 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BETTY DUKES; PATRICIA SURGESON; 

CLEO PAGE; DEBORAH GUNTER;

KAREN WILLIAMSON; CHRISTINE

KWAPNOSKI; EDITH ARANA, No. 04-16688 Plaintiffs-Appellees,  D.C. No. v. CV-01-02252-MJJ

WAL-MART, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant. 

BETTY DUKES; PATRICIA SURGESON; 

CLEO PAGE; DEBORAH GUNTER;

KAREN WILLIAMSON; CHRISTINE No. 04-16720

KWAPNOSKI; EDITH ARANA,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,  D.C. No.

CV-01-02252-MJJ

v. ORDER

WAL-MART, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.  Filed February 13, 2009

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

1935 1936 DUKES v. WAL-MART, INC. Judges McKeown, Rawlinson and Bybee did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

PRINTED FOR

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS

BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does…

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.