Case Name: ARKANSAS GAME & FISH COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-08-11
Citations: 648 F.3d 1377
Docket Number: Nos. 2009-5121, 2010-5029
Parties: ARKANSAS GAME & FISH COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, Circuit Judges, and WHYTE , District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 648
Pages: 1377–1384

Head Matter:
ARKANSAS GAME & FISH COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 2009-5121, 2010-5029.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Aug. 11, 2011.
Julie D. Greathouse, Perkins & Trotter, PLLC, of Little Rock, AR, filed a petition for rehearing en banc for plaintiff-cross appellant. With her on the petition were James F. Goodhart and John P. Marks, Arkansas Game & Fish Commission, of Little Rock, AR.
Robert J. Lundman, Attorney, Environment & Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, filed a response for defendant-appellant. With him on the response was Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General. Of counsel was Sambhav N. Sankar, Attorney.
Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, Circuit Judges, and WHYTE , District Judge.
Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, District Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation, did not participate in the decision of whether to rehear the appeal en banc.

Opinion:
DYK, Circuit Judge, with whom GAJARSA and LINN, Circuit Judges, join, concurs in the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
MOORE, Circuit Judge, with whom O'MALLEY and REYNA, Circuit Judges, join, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by DefendanWAppellant. The petition for rehearing was referred to the panel that heard the appeals, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc and the response were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll of whether to rehear the appeals en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.
Upon consideration thereof,
It Is Ordered That:
(1) The petition of Plaintiff-Cross Appellant for panel rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition of Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, for rehearing en banc is denied.
(3)The mandate of the court will issue on August 18, 2011.