Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
CA9, Mar. 29, 2018 - "Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion [869 F.3d 780 (9th Cir. 2017)] shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit."
Courtesy of counsel, here is a link to the PETITIONER’S PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING WITH SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC, and here is a link to the BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE IMMIGRANT DEFENSE PROJECT, AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE-ASIAN LAW CAUCUS, COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES IN EAST PALO ALTO, DETENTION WATCH NETWORK, FLORENCE IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS PROJECT, HEARTLAND ALLIANCE’S NATIONAL IMMIGRANT JUSTICE CENTER, IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION PROJECT OF THE NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD, NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT, PUBLIC COUNSEL, AND U.C. DAVIS IMMIGRATION LAW CLINIC IN SUPPORT OF REHEARING EN BANC.