Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Lockyer

Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Lockyer, 435 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2006)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
2006-01-17
Topic
general

ORDER Upon the vote of a majority of nonre-cused regular active judges of this court,1 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. . Judge Berzon is recused.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Lockyer. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF U.S. v. LOCKYER,435 F.3d 999(9th Cir. 2006)
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES; California Chamber of Commerce;
Employers Group; California Healthcare Association; California
Manufacturers And Technology Assn.; California Association of Health
Facilities; California Association of Home Services for the Aging;
Bettec Corporation; Marksherm Corporation; Zilaco Inc., Zilaco; del Rio
Healthcare, Inc.; Beverly Health Rehabilitation Services, Inc. dba
Beverly Manor Costa Mesa; Internext Group, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
Page 1000
American Federation of Labor And Congress of Industrial
Organizations; California Labor Federation,
AFLCIO, Intervenors-Appellants, v. Bill
LOCKYER, Attorney General, in his capacity as
Attorney General of the State of California;
Department Of Health Services; Frank G.
Vanacore, as the Chief of the Audit Review and
Analysis Section of the California Department
of Health Services; Diana M. Bonta, Diana M.
Bonta, R.N., Dr., P.h.D, as the Director of
the California Department of Health Services,
Defendants. Chamber of Commerce of the United
States; California Chamber of Commerce;
Employers Group; California Healthcare
Association; California Manufacturers and
Technology Assn.; California Association of
Health Facilities; California Association of
Home Services for the Aging; Bettec
Corporation; Marksherm Corporation; Zilaco
Inc., Zilaco; del Rio Healthcare, Inc.;
Beverly Health Rehabilitation Services,
Inc. dba Beverly Manor Costa Mesa; Internext
Group, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and American
Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations; California Labor Federation,
AFLCIO, Intervenors, v. Bill Lockyer, Attorney
General, in his capacity as Attorney General
of the State of California; Department of
Health Services; Frank G. Vanacore, as the
Chief of the Audit Review and Analysis Section
of the California Department of Health
Services; Diana M. Bonta, Diana M. Bonta,
R.N., Dr., P.h.D, as the Director of the
California Department of Health Services,
Defendants-Appellants.
Nos. 03-55166, 03-55169.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
January 17, 2006.
Stephen A. Bokat, Esq., National Chamber Litigation Center, Bradley W. Kampas, Esq., Washington, DC, Scott W. Oborne, Esq., Jackson Lewis LLP, Mark A. Johnson, Esq., Mark E. Reagan, Esq., Hooper. Lundy Bookman, Inc., San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Scott A. Kronland, Esq., Altshuler Berzon Nussbaum Rubin Demain, San Francisco, CA, for Intervenors.

Suzanne M. Ambrose, DAG, AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General, Department of Justice, Sacramento, CA, Richard T. Waldow, DAG, AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellants.
Before: SCHROEDER, Chief Judge.
ORDER
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court,1it 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.Page 1001
  1. Judge Berzon is recused. ↩