Gallo Cattle Co. v. California Milk Advisory Bd.

122 F.3d 1071 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. GALLOT CATTLE COMPANY, a California Limited Partnership, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA MILK ADVISORY BOARD; Ann M. Veneman, in her official capacity as the Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture; State of California, DefendantsAppellees. No. 97-15858. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 25, 1997.** Filed Aug. 28, 1997. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Edward J. Garcia, District Judge, Presiding Before SCHROEDER, FERNANDEZ and RYMER, Circuit Judges MEMORANDUM* In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc., --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 2130 (1997), the court vacates the district court's order dissolving the stay and remands to permit further argument consistent with Glickman. VACATED and REMANDED. Footnotes [-s-s] ** The panel unanimously agrees that this case is appropriate for submission without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 34(a) and Ninth Cir. R. 34-4. Accordingly, appellant's request for oral argument is denied [-s] * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Cir. R. 36-3. Accordingly, appellant's motion for oral argument is denied