Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Veneman

482 F.3d 1156

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
2007-04-06
Topic
general

482 F.3d 1156 ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND; Animal Welfare Institute; Valerie Buchanan; Jane Garrison; Nancy Megna, Plaintiffs-Appellants, National Association for Biomedical Research, Intervenor-Appellee, v. Ann M. VENEMAN; Bobby R. Acord; Chester A. Gipson, Defendants-Appellees.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Veneman. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
2 opinions

482 F.3d 1156

ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND; Animal Welfare Institute; Valerie Buchanan; Jane Garrison; Nancy Megna, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
National Association for Biomedical Research, Intervenor-Appellee,
v.
Ann M. VENEMAN; Bobby R. Acord; Chester A. Gipson, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-15788.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 6, 2007.

Howard M. Crystal, Katherine A. Meyer, Meyer & Glitzenstein, Washington, DC, Bruce A. Wagman, Schiff Hardin LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Robert A. Long, Jr., Covington & Burling, Washington, DC, for Intervenor-Appellee.

John S. Koppel, Michael Jay Singer, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Appellate Staff, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees.

ORDER

SCHROEDER, Chief Judge.

1

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