Well, no cert petition yet, but the Ninth Circuit rejected the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's petition for rehearing en banc. I earlier posted about this case here.
Per the court:
The opinion is amended as follows:Defendants-Appellees’ petition for rehearing en banc is denied. See Fed. R. App. P. 35.Paul Watson’s petition for rehearing en banc of our April 1, 2013, order denying him leave to file a late supplemental petition for rehearing en banc is also denied. See id. We are unpersuaded by Watson’s belated claim that he and co-defendant-appellee Sea Shepherd developed “divergent interests.” Watson had months to consider whether his interests diverge from Sea Shepherd’s, yet claims to have discovered only recently that they do. He does not explain how or why. His bald assurance that “serious grounds exist[]” is too little, too late.
No further petitions for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc may be filed.
Next stop, Supreme Court? We shall see.
Comments