Filed: May 07, 2020
Latest Update: May 07, 2020
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 7 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF No. 17-55723 AFRICAN-AMERICAN OWNED MEDIA, a California Limited Liability Company; D.C. No. ENTERTAINMENT STUDIOS 2:16-cv-00609-GW-FFM NETWORKS, INC., a California corporation, ORDER* Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant-Appellant. On Remand from the United States Supreme Court Before: SCH
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 7 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF No. 17-55723 AFRICAN-AMERICAN OWNED MEDIA, a California Limited Liability Company; D.C. No. ENTERTAINMENT STUDIOS 2:16-cv-00609-GW-FFM NETWORKS, INC., a California corporation, ORDER* Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant-Appellant. On Remand from the United States Supreme Court Before: SCHR..
More
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 7 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF No. 17-55723
AFRICAN-AMERICAN OWNED MEDIA,
a California Limited Liability Company; D.C. No.
ENTERTAINMENT STUDIOS 2:16-cv-00609-GW-FFM
NETWORKS, INC., a California
corporation,
ORDER*
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a
Delaware corporation,
Defendant-Appellant.
On Remand from the United States Supreme Court
Before: SCHROEDER, M. SMITH, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
On March 30, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court granted Appellant’s petition for
certiorari, vacated our opinion filed February 4, 2019, and remanded for further
consideration in light of Comcast Corp. v. National Assn. of African American-
Owned Media, 589 U. S. ___ (2020). We hereby VACATE the district court’s
decision and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with Comcast.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2