Do Sung Uhm v. Humana Inc.
Citation | 573 F.3d 865 |
Decision Date | 22 July 2009 |
Docket Number | No. 06-35672.,06-35672. |
Parties | DO SUNG UHM; Eun Sook Uhm, a married couple, individually and for all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HUMANA INC., a Delaware corporation; Humana Health Plan Inc., a Kentucky corporation doing business as Humana, Defendants-Appellees. |
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
Scott C. Breneman, Breneman Law Firm, Joseph Andrew Grube, Ricci Grube Aita, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Brian D. Boyle, Mark Davies, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Washington, DC, Mary Rebecca Knack, Williams Kastner & Gibbs, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Defendants-Appellees.
D.C. No. CV-06-00185-RSM, Western District of Washington, Seattle.
Before: B. FLETCHER, RICHARD A. PAEZ and MARSHA S. BERZON,* Circuit Judges.
Appellees' request for reconsideration shall be treated as a petition for panel rehearing and is GRANTED. The opinion filed on August 25, 2008 and reported at 540 F.3d 980 (9th Cir.2008) is WITHDRAWN and shall not be cited as precedent. The petition for rehearing en banc is moot. The panel will file a new disposition in due course.
* Due to the unavailability of Senior District Judge William Schwarzer, Judge Berzon has been randomly drawn as a replacement judge.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Situated v. Humana Inc.
... 620 F.3d 1134 DO SUNG UHM; Eun Sook Uhm, a married couple, individually and for all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HUMANA, INC., a Delaware corporation; Humana Health Plan, Inc., a Kentucky corporation doing business as Humana, Defendants-Appellees. No. 06-35672. United States Court of ... ...
-
Cotton v. Starcare Medical Group, Inc., G040920.
... ... The only authority PacifiCare cites to support application of conflict preemption in this context is the opinion in Uhm v. Humana, Inc. (9th Cir. 2008) 540 F.3d 980. But the Ninth Circuit subsequently withdrew its prior opinion and directed it "shall not be cited as precedent." ... ...
- United States v. Arvizu