Court Opinion

ID: 9497192
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 16:45:22.922885+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:58:02.956443
License: Public Domain

ORDER

LARIMER, Judge.
A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by the Appellant, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by the Appellees.1
This matter was referred first as a petition for rehearing to the merits panel that heard this appeal. Thereafter, the petition for rehearing en banc, response, and the amici curiae brief were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.
Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
*1304(1) The petition for rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.
NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, dissents in a separate opinion.
LOURIE, Circuit Judge, concurs in a separate opinion.
RADER, Circuit Judge, with whom GAJARSA and LINN, Circuit Judges, join, dissents in a separate opinion.
LINN, Circuit Judge, with whom RADER and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges, join, dissents in a separate opinion.
DYK, Circuit Judge, concurs in a separate opinion.
The mandate of the court will issue on July 9, 2004.

. The Regents of the University of California, et al. filed an amici curiae brief.