Case Name: Kimberly RENDISH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TACOMA; Ray C. Corpuz, City Manager for the City of Tacoma, in his Individual Capacity; Robin Jenkinson, City Attorney for the City of Tacoma, in her Individual Capacity; John Kouklis, Chief Assistant City Attorney for the City of Tacoma, in his Individual Capacity; John Does 1-10, in their Individual Capacities; Jane Does 1-10, in their Individual Capacities, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1998-01-26
Citations: 134 F.3d 1389
Docket Number: No. 96-36150
Parties: Kimberly RENDISH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TACOMA; Ray C. Corpuz, City Manager for the City of Tacoma, in his Individual Capacity; Robin Jenkinson, City Attorney for the City of Tacoma, in her Individual Capacity; John Kouklis, Chief Assistant City Attorney for the City of Tacoma, in his Individual Capacity; John Does 1-10, in their Individual Capacities; Jane Does 1-10, in their Individual Capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: LAY, BEEZER, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 134
Pages: 1389–1393

Head Matter:
Kimberly RENDISH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TACOMA; Ray C. Corpuz, City Manager for the City of Tacoma, in his Individual Capacity; Robin Jenkinson, City Attorney for the City of Tacoma, in her Individual Capacity; John Kouklis, Chief Assistant City Attorney for the City of Tacoma, in his Individual Capacity; John Does 1-10, in their Individual Capacities; Jane Does 1-10, in their Individual Capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 96-36150.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Jan. 26, 1998.
Before: LAY, BEEZER, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
The Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
Order; Dissent by
Judge REINHARDT.
The panel as constituted in the above case has voted to deny the petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for a rehearing en banc.
The full court was advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. An active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35.
The petition for rehearing is DENIED and the suggestion for a rehearing en banc is REJECTED.
. The motion to supplement the Excerpt of Record is denied.