Ninth Circuit denies en banc rehearing in CAFA "less is more" case: Amalgamated v. Laidlaw

Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit denied en banc rehearing of its "less is more" opinion, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1309, AFL-CIO v. Laidlaw Transit Servs., Inc., 435 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir. 2006). The order denying rehearing is here. It is an interesting order because it includes not only a six-judge dissent, but also an introductory explanation (presumably authored by the original panel) further justifying the conclusion that CAFA's language and legislative history compel the result that the 7-day time period to file a petition for permission to appeal from an order granting or denying remand is a deadline, not a waiting period. My original post on Amalgamated is here.