Case ID: f3d_868/html/1341-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WALLACH, Circuit Judge, PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jeffery S. MUSSELMAN, Petitioner v. DEPARTMENT OF the ARMY, Respondent
    2016-2522
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    July 20, 2017
    
      Robert J. Gajarsa, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, filed a petition for hearing en banc for petitioner Jeffery S. Musselman. Also represented by Gabriel Bell, Savannah Kent Burgoyne, Michael J. 'Gerardi, Emily K Sauter.
    Mariana Teresa Acevedo, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, filed a response to the petition for respondent Department of the Army. Also represented by Chad A. Readler, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr„ Claudia Burke; Rebecca E. Ausprung, United States Army Litigation Division, Fort Belvoir, VA.
    Before PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, DYK, O’MALLEY, REYNA, WALLACH, TARANTO, CHEN, HUGHES, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
    
    
      
       Circuit Judge Moore did not participate.
    
   WALLACH, Circuit Judge,

with whom NEWMAN and O’MALLEY, Circuit Judges, join, dissent from the denial of the petition for hearing en banc for the reasons stated in the dissent from denial of the petition for rehearing en banc in Fedora v. Merit Systems Protection Board, No. 15-3039.

STOLL, Circuit Judge, dissents without opinion from the denial of the petition for hearing en banc.

ON PETITION FOR HEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Petitioner Jeffery S. Musselman filed a petition for initial hearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by the court and filed by respondent Department of the Army. The petition and response were referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

The petition for initial hearing en banc is denied.