Filed: Feb. 08, 1999
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: PUBLISH IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 97-6910 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ 07/06/99 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D.C. Docket No. 97-P-1300-S UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus PEMCO AEROPLEX, INC., a subsidiary of Precision Standard Company, a corporation, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _ (Opinion February 8 , 1999, 166 F.3d 1311 , 11th Cir., 1999) (July 6,
Summary: PUBLISH IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 97-6910 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ 07/06/99 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D.C. Docket No. 97-P-1300-S UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus PEMCO AEROPLEX, INC., a subsidiary of Precision Standard Company, a corporation, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _ (Opinion February 8 , 1999, 166 F.3d 1311 , 11th Cir., 1999) (July 6, ..
More
PUBLISH
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 97-6910 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________________ 07/06/99
THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 97-P-1300-S
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
PEMCO AEROPLEX, INC., a subsidiary of
Precision Standard Company, a corporation,
Defendant-Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Alabama
_________________________________________________________________
(Opinion February 8 , 1999,
166 F.3d 1311, 11th Cir., 1999)
(July 6, 1999)
Before ANDERSON, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH,
DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on
whether this case should be reheard by the Court sitting en banc, and a majority of
the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a
rehearing en banc,
IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court
en banc. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.
2