Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Dukes v. Wal-Mart, Inc., 04-16688 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 04-16688 Visitors: 4
Filed: Feb. 13, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BETTY DUKES; PATRICIA SURGESON; CLEO PAGE; DEBORAH GUNTER; KAREN WILLIAMSON; CHRISTINE KWAPNOSKI; EDITH ARANA, No. 04-16688 Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. v. CV-01-02252-MJJ WAL-MART, INC., Defendant-Appellant. BETTY DUKES; PATRICIA SURGESON; CLEO PAGE; DEBORAH GUNTER; KAREN WILLIAMSON; CHRISTINE No. 04-16720 KWAPNOSKI; EDITH ARANA, Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. CV-01-02252-MJJ v. ORDER WAL-MART, INC., Defendant-App
More
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BETTY DUKES; PATRICIA SURGESON;  CLEO PAGE; DEBORAH GUNTER; KAREN WILLIAMSON; CHRISTINE KWAPNOSKI; EDITH ARANA, No. 04-16688 Plaintiffs-Appellees,  D.C. No. v. CV-01-02252-MJJ WAL-MART, INC., Defendant-Appellant.  BETTY DUKES; PATRICIA SURGESON;  CLEO PAGE; DEBORAH GUNTER; KAREN WILLIAMSON; CHRISTINE No. 04-16720 KWAPNOSKI; EDITH ARANA, Plaintiffs-Appellants,  D.C. No. CV-01-02252-MJJ v. ORDER WAL-MART, INC., Defendant-Appellee.  Filed February 13, 2009 ORDER KOZINSKI, Chief Judge: Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. 1935 1936 DUKES v. WAL-MART, INC. Judges McKeown, Rawlinson and Bybee did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case. PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2009 Thomson Reuters/West.
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer