eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 1995-09

Dawud Halisi MALIK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Neal BROWN, Defendant-Appellee , 65 F.3d 148 ( 1995 )


Menu:

  • 65 F.3d 148

    95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7127, 95 Daily Journal
    D.A.R. 12,141
    Dawud Halisi MALIK, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Neal BROWN, Defendant-Appellee.

    No. 91-36320.

    United States Court of Appeals,
    Ninth Circuit.

    Sept. 8, 1995.

    1

    Before BEEZER and CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judges, and SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge.*

    ORDER

    2

    Sua sponte, we recall the mandate. Zipfel v. Halliburton Co., 861 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.1988).

    3

    It has come to the attention of the court that Congress adopted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. Secs. 2000bb-1 to 2000bb-4 ("RFRA"), prior to the date our opinion was filed. RFRA was not called to our attention by the parties in a post-filing petition. Our research did not disclose its existence prior to filing.

    4

    RFRA sets a different standard than the one adopted in our opinion. Malik v. Brown, 16 F.3d 330, 333-34 (9th Cir.1994). If we applied RFRA, Malik would still have been the prevailing party. This order memorializes our adoption of RFRA as the proper standard governing this case.

    5

    Upon entry of this ORDER, the mandate shall issue forthwith.

    *

    The Honorable Samuel Conti, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation