#### Kristin M. PERRY; Sandra B. Stier; Paul T. Katami; Jeffrey J. Zarrillo, Plaintiffs-Appellees, City and County of San Francisco, Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edmund G. BROWN, Jr., in his official capacity as Governor of California; Kamala D. Harris, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California; Mark B. Horton, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health & State Registrar of Vital Statistics; Linette Scott, in her official capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information & Strategic Planning for the California Department of Public Health; Patrick O’Connell, in his official capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County of Alameda; Dean C. Logan, in his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk for the County of Los Angeles, Defendants, Hak-Shing William Tam, Intervenor-Defendant, and Dennis Hollingsworth; Gail J. Knight; Martin F. Gutierrez; Mark A. Jansson; Protectmarriage.Com-Yes On 8, a Project of California Renewal, as official proponents of Proposition 8, Intervenor-Defendants-Appellants. Kristin M. Perry; Sandra B. Stier; Paul T. Katami; Jeffrey J. Zarrillo, Plaintiffs-Appellees, City and County of San Francisco, Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., in his official capacity as Governor of California; Kamala D. Harris, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California; Mark B. Horton, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health & State Registrar of Vital Statistics; Linette Scott, in her official capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information & Strategic Planning for the California Department of Public Health; Patrick O’Connell, in his official capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County of Alameda; Dean C. Logan, in his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk for the County of Los Angeles, Defendants, Hak-Shing William Tam, Intervenor-Defendant, and Dennis Hollingsworth; Gail J. Knight; Martin F. Gutierrez; Mark A. Jansson; Protectmarriage.Com-Yes On 8, a Project of California Renewal, as official proponents of Proposition 8, Intervenor-Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 10-16696, 11-16577.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 6, 2013.

David Boies, Rosanne C. Baxter, Esquire, Counsel, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Armonk, NY, Jeremy Michael Goldman, Esquire, Boies, Schiller & Flenxer, LLP, Oakland, CA, Theodore J. Boutrous, *1141Jr., Esquire, Christopher D. Dusseault, Theane Evangelis Kapur, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Ethan Douglas Dettmer, Esquire, Enrique Antonio Monagas, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA, Theodore Olson, Matthew McGill, Amir C. Tayrani, Gibson Dunn *&*Crutcher, LLP, Washington, DC, Theodore H. Uno, Bois Schiller & Flexner LLP, Hollywood, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Danny Chou, Office of the County Counsel, San Jose, CA, Ronald P. Flynn, Therese Stewart, Chief Deputy City, Christine Van Aken, Deputy City, Erin Bernstein, Deputy City, Vince Chhabria, Esquire, Dennis J. Herrera, City, Mollie Mindes Lee, Deputy City, San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, San Francisco, CA, for Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee.

Tamar Pachter, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Daniel Powell, Deputy Attorney General, California Department of Justice, San Francisco, CA, Kenneth C. Mennemeier, Jr., Mennemeier, Glassman & Stroud LLP, Sacramento, CA, Claude Franklin Kolm, Esquire, Office of County Counsel, Oakland, CA, Judy W. Whitehurst, Principal Deputy County Counsel, Office of the County Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants.

David Thompson, Charles J. Cooper, Nicole Jo Moss, Peter A. Patterson, Cooper *&*Kirk, PLLC, Washington, DC, Andrew P. Pugno, Law Offices of Andrew P. Pug-no, Folsom, CA, James Andrew Campbell, Brian William Raum, Senior Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom, Scottsdale, AZ, for Intervenor-Defendants-Appellants.

Before: STEPHEN REINHARDT, MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, and N. RANDY SMITH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

In accordance with the Supreme Court’s opinion of June 26, 2013 as well as the resulting judgment, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The clerk is directed to issue the mandate forthwith.