Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves petitioners Michelle Thomas, David George Thomas, Tyneal Michelle Thomas, and Shaldon Waide Thomas challenging John Ashcroft, the Attorney General, before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The court has decided to rehear the case en banc, meaning it will be reviewed by all active judges rather than a three-judge panel. Consequently, the prior opinion issued by the three-judge panel is not to be cited as precedent by the court or any district court within the Ninth Circuit, unless it is adopted by the en banc court. This order reflects a significant procedural step in the appellate process, indicating that the case has garnered sufficient interest or complexity to warrant a full court review.
Legal Issues Addressed
Precedential Value of Panel Opinionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The prior opinion issued by the three-judge panel cannot be cited as precedent in the Ninth Circuit unless adopted by the en banc court.
Reasoning: Consequently, the prior opinion issued by the three-judge panel is not to be cited as precedent by the court or any district court within the Ninth Circuit, unless it is adopted by the en banc court.
Rehearing En Banc Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to rehear the case en banc, which involves a review by all active judges rather than the original three-judge panel.
Reasoning: The court has decided to rehear the case en banc, meaning it will be reviewed by all active judges rather than a three-judge panel.
Significance of En Banc Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision to rehear the case en banc indicates that it has garnered sufficient interest or complexity to require a full court review.
Reasoning: This order reflects a significant procedural step in the appellate process, indicating that the case has garnered sufficient interest or complexity to warrant a full court review.