Case Name: Jarek MOLSKI; Disability Rights Enfrocement Education Services: Helping You Help Others, a California public benefit corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EVERGREEN DYNASTY CORP., d/b/a Mandarin Touch Restaurant; Brian McInerney; Kathy S. McInerney, as joint tenants, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-07
Citations: 521 F.3d 1215
Docket Number: No. 05-56452
Parties: Jarek MOLSKI; Disability Rights Enfrocement Education Services: Helping You Help Others, a California public benefit corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EVERGREEN DYNASTY CORP., d/b/a Mandarin Touch Restaurant; Brian McInerney; Kathy S. McInerney, as joint tenants, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before JEROME FARRIS and RONALD M. GOULD, Circuit Judges, and KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, Senior Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 521
Pages: 1215–1222

Head Matter:
Jarek MOLSKI; Disability Rights Enfrocement Education Services: Helping You Help Others, a California public benefit corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EVERGREEN DYNASTY CORP., d/b/a Mandarin Touch Restaurant; Brian McInerney; Kathy S. McInerney, as joint tenants, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-56452.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
April 7, 2008.
As Amended April 22, 2008.
Thomas E. Frankovich, Esq., Thomas E. Frankovich A Professional Law Corporation, San Francisco, CA, Jennifer L. Steneberg, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas E. Frankovich, San Francisco, CA, Stephen Yagman, Esq., Yagman & Yagman & Reichmann, Venice Beach, CA, Jessica A. Dayton, Esq., The Frankovich Group, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Robert Appert, San Gabriel, CA, Alan H. Boon, Irvine, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before JEROME FARRIS and RONALD M. GOULD, Circuit Judges, and KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, Senior Judge.
The Honorable Kevin Thomas Duffy, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
ORDER
All judges on the panel have voted to deny Plaintiff' Appellant's Petition for Panel Rehearing, and so that petition is DENIED.
The full court has been advised of Plaintiff/Appellant's Petition for Rehearing En Banc, and a judge of this court requested a vote on whether this case should be reheard en banc; however, a majority of the non-recused active judges of the court did not vote in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35. Accordingly, the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is also DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc shall be considered.
Judges Graber and Fisher were recused from considering the en banc issues in this case and did not participate in the court's decision.