Case: The Honorable John H. McBRYDE, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, Appellant, v. COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CIRCUIT COUNCIL CONDUCT AND DISABILITY ORDERS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., Appellees
Abbreviation: McBryde v. Committee to Review Circuit Council Conduct & Disability Orders of the Judicial Conference of the United States
Decision Date: 2002-02-01
Docket Number: No. 00-5016
Citation: 349 U.S. App. D.C. 355
Volume: 349
Reporter: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Parties: The Honorable John H. McBRYDE, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, Appellant, v. COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CIRCUIT COUNCIL CONDUCT AND DISABILITY ORDERS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., Appellees.
Judges: BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, EDWARDS, SENTELLE, HENDERSON, RANDOLPH, ROGERS, TATEL and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.
Pages: 355–356

Head Matter:
278 F.3d 29
The Honorable John H. McBRYDE, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, Appellant, v. COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CIRCUIT COUNCIL CONDUCT AND DISABILITY ORDERS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., Appellees.
No. 00-5016.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed Feb. 1, 2002.
BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, EDWARDS, SENTELLE, HENDERSON, RANDOLPH, ROGERS, TATEL and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.
Circuit Judges SENTELLE, ROGERS and TATEL would grant the petition for rehearing en banc.
A statement of Circuit Judge TATEL dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc, in which Circuit Judge SENTELLE joins, is attached.
Circuit Judges EDWARDS, RANDOLPH and GARLAND did not participate in this matter.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
Appellant's petition for rehearing en banc and the response thereto have been circulated to the full court. The taking of a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges of the court in regular, active service did not vote in favor of the petition. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the petition be denied.