<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oembed><version>1.0</version><provider_name>CLP Blog</provider_name><provider_url>https://clpblog.citizen.org</provider_url><author_name>Brian Wolfman</author_name><title>Third Circuit denies en banc rehearing request in Carrera class-action "ascertainability" appeal - CLP Blog</title><type>rich</type><width>600</width><height>338</height><html>&lt;blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="CFarqdFzLM"&gt;&lt;a href="https://clpblog.citizen.org/third-circuit-denies-en-banc-rehearing-request-in-carrera-class-action-ascertainibility-appeal/"&gt;Third Circuit denies en banc rehearing request in Carrera class-action &#x201C;ascertainability&#x201D; appeal&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://clpblog.citizen.org/third-circuit-denies-en-banc-rehearing-request-in-carrera-class-action-ascertainibility-appeal/embed/#?secret=CFarqdFzLM" width="600" height="338" title="&#x201C;Third Circuit denies en banc rehearing request in Carrera class-action &#x201C;ascertainability&#x201D; appeal&#x201D; &#x2014; CLP Blog" data-secret="CFarqdFzLM" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;script type="text/javascript"&gt;
/* &lt;![CDATA[ */
/*! This file is auto-generated */
!function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&amp;&amp;d.addEventListener&amp;&amp;"undefined"!=typeof URL&amp;&amp;(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&amp;&amp;!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i&lt;o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i&lt;a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&amp;&amp;(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3&lt;(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r&lt;200&amp;&amp;(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&amp;&amp;(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&amp;&amp;n.host===r.host&amp;&amp;l.activeElement===s&amp;&amp;(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r&lt;s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document);
/* ]]&gt; */
&lt;/script&gt;
</html><description>With four judges dissenting from en banc rehearing and the three original panel members explaining why they think they were right the first time around. Read today's opinions here. The dissenters, in an opinion written by Judge Thomas Ambro, say that the federal rules committee should take up the issues raised by the panel's decision. [...]</description></oembed>
