Case Name: Stephen E. BYRNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP, David S. Stallard, Kevin G. Rooney, Theodore R. Remaklus, P. Andrew Blatt, and Wayne L. Jacobs, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-22
Citations: 676 F.3d 1024
Docket Number: No. 2011-1012
Parties: Stephen E. BYRNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP, David S. Stallard, Kevin G. Rooney, Theodore R. Remaklus, P. Andrew Blatt, and Wayne L. Jacobs, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 676
Pages: 1024–1041

Head Matter:
Stephen E. BYRNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP, David S. Stallard, Kevin G. Rooney, Theodore R. Remaklus, P. Andrew Blatt, and Wayne L. Jacobs, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 2011-1012.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
March 22, 2012.
James A. Jablonski, Law Office of James A. Jablonski, of Denver, CO, filed a petition for rehearing en banc for plaintiff-appellant.
J. Robert Chambers, Wood, Herron & Evans, L.L.P., of Cincinnati, OH, filed a response to the petition for defendantsappellees.
Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges.
DYK, Circuit Judge, with whom NEWMAN and LOURIE, Circuit Judges, join, concurs in the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge, with whom WALLACH, Circuit Judge, joins, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
Judge Gajarsa participated in the decision for panel rehearing.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by Plaintiff-Appellant, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Defendants-Appellees. The petition for rehearing was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, 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 appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.
Upon consideration thereof,
It Is Ordered That:
(1) The petition of Plaintiff-Appellant for panel rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition of Plaintiff-Appellant for rehearing en banc is denied.
(3) The mandate of the court will issue on March 29, 2012.