Summary
vacating panel opinion and orderingrehearing en banc
Summary of this case from United States v. KrieselOpinion
No. 10–15152.
2012-07-25
Elizabeth Aida HASKELL; Reginald Ento; Jeffrey Patrick Lyons, Jr.; Aakash Desai, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Kamala D. HARRIS, Attorney General of California; Eva Steinberger, Assistant Bureau Chief for DNA Programs, California Department of Justice, Defendants–Appellees.
Eric Andrew Long, Esquire, Peter C. Meier, Esquire, Paul Hastings LLP, Michael Temple Risher, Staff, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs–Appellants. Daniel Powell, Deputy Attorney General, California Department of Justice, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants–Appellees.
Eric Andrew Long, Esquire, Peter C. Meier, Esquire, Paul Hastings LLP, Michael Temple Risher, Staff, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs–Appellants. Daniel Powell, Deputy Attorney General, California Department of Justice, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants–Appellees.
D.C. No. 3:09–cv–04779–CRB.
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 Fed. R.App. P. 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35–3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.
Judges Nguyen, Watford and Hurwitz did not participate in the deliberations or vote as to whether the case should be taken en banc.