Case ID: f-appx_622/html/0643-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David MEDNANSKY, individually and Martine Mednansky, individually, Defendants-Appellants.
    No. 13-55662.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Nov. 10, 2015.
    Robert Parke Stockman, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      David Mednansky, Alpine, CA, pro se.
    Martine Mednansky, Alpine, CA, pro se.
    Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge and HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER

The memorandum disposition filed on September 4, 2015, 2015 WL 5167842, is amended as follows:

On page 2, line 13, the text <83,3(g)(l)> is deleted and replaced with <83.3(f)(l)>.

The panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing.

The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge of the court has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. RApp. P. 35. Appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc is denied.

No further petitions shall be entertained.