Sentences with phrase «as en banc»

The three «fractured opinions,» as one legal expert put it, increase the chances that the plaintiffs can successfully petition for a new review by the full court, known as an en banc hearing.

Last week, AARP filed an appeal of the Fifth Circuit ruling, while New York, Oregon and California filed a motion asking the court for permission to rehear the case in front of the full panel of judges — known as an en banc review.

Not exact matches

An en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, ruled 7 - 4 that the two officers did not have qualified immunity over handcuffing the student identified as C.B., who had failed to take his medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder on what the student later called a «rough day.»

This is even more true today as we near the Federal Circuit's en banc ruling in Lighting Ballast Control LCC v. Philips Elec. N. Am.

Now, as evidenced by this new order refusing en banc review, the Ninth Circuit has added an extra chapter to this story.

Bashman writes that Allen discussed the recusal issue not out of malice (as the panel suggested) but rather because the recusal issue was directly relevant to Judge Allen's reason for voting to grant rehearing en banc.

Patent lawyers can barely control their excitement — or anxiety — in the wake of this week's news that the Supreme Court has agreed to review In re Bilski, the Federal Circuit's October en banc opinion that is seen as having sounded the death knell for business methods patents, including software patents.

As Lyle Denniston at SCOTUS Blog reports here, the D.C. Circuit today denied rehearing en banc by a vote of 6 - 4 in Parker v. District of Columbia, thus paving the way for resolution of the case by the Supreme Court.

But, here, two of the Second Circuit's active judges ruled against Marblegate, the dissent was by a senior judge who can not vote on an en banc petition, and the Second Circuit has historically granted fewer en banc rehearings than any other circuit court.5 Other avenues could include Marblegate filing a petition for a writ of certiorari with the US Supreme Court and / or pursuing other federal or state law remedies, including state law theories of successor liability or fraudulent conveyance against the new EDMC subsidiary, theories that the Second Circuit noted as potential causes of action but did not analyze.

(Of note, her petition relies in part on the Ninth Circuit's recent split decision invalidating the personal solicitation canon as applied to non-judges, but the Ninth Circuit has since agreed to rehear the appeal en banc this December.

(d) After hearing and consideration en banc, the judgment of the majority of the members of this Court participating in the case shall be entered as the judgment of this Court.

As previously detailed here, late last year the Sixth Circuit ordered en banc review in US v. White, a case involving the status of acquitted conduct guideline enhancements in the wake of Booker.

The Court of Review is an appellate court, and like other Article III appellate courts, it has the power to bind both lower courts (in this case, the FISC) and later Court of Review panels.22 The Court of Review probably has the same discretion as federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedentiaas federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedentiaas precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedentiaAs with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedentiaas precedential.

The courts could retain discretion over whether to publish opinions not treated as binding on future judges.62 Therefore, every precedential opinion of the Court of Review and every FISC en banc opinion should be published in redacted form.

, vacated as moot on reh» g en banc, 235 F. 3d 1054 (8th Cir.

Had the Anastasoff case not become moot before the en banc Eighth Circuit could reach the merits, was it your prediction that the en banc court would have agreed with you the local rule declaring unpublished opinions non-precedential should be abolished, and why has the Eighth Circuit not repealed, via the rulemaking process, the rule your panel opinion condemned as unconstitutional?

Additionally, as urged by the prior Commission when defending the Title II Order, and as confirmed in the concurrence in the denial of rehearing en banc by the two judges in the majority in USTelecom, the Title II Order allows ISPs to offer curated services, which would allow ISPs to escape the reach of the Title II Order and to filter content on viewpoint grounds.

En banc review is also needed to protect low - income Texas women's access to needed preventive health care such as breast exams, birth control, pap tests and STD screenings to nearly 50,000 low - income Texas women.

The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld an earlier determination that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau had incorrectly rejected a long - standing RESPA interpretation that payments made to settlement service providers are permissible so long as those payments are for goods or services actually provided and are for fair market value.