Livid Holdings Ltd. v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.

ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed on April 6, 2005, and published at 403 F.3d 1050 , is AMENDED as follows.

403 F.3d at 1054, Col. 1, Ln. 17:

403 F.3d at 1054, Col. 2, Ln. 8-13:

403 F.3d at 1056, Col. 1, Ln. 11:

403 F.3d at 1057, Col. 1, Ln. 41:

403 F.3d at 1057, Col. 2, Ln. 34:

403 F.3d at 1057, Col. 2, Ln. 35:

403 F.3d at 1058, Col. 1, Ln. 26-30:

403 F.3d at 1058, Col. 1, Ln. 30-31:

Delete “Our case law requires no more.” 403 F.3d at 1058, Col. 2, Ln. 14:

With these amendments, the panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judge Reinhardt and Judge Thomas have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. Judge D.W. Nelson recommended denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge of the court has requested a vote on it.

The petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing or petitions for rehearing en banc may be filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

OPINION

Livid Holdings, Ltd. (“Livid”) appeals the district court’s dismissal with…