Can that appeal to rehear en banc be denied, or is it automatically going to be a go?

Does this help?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_35

This being the 9th Circus, I guess there will be an en banc hearing and we have to rely on the luck of the draw to win.

This being the 9th Circus, I guess there will be an en banc hearing and we have to rely on the luck of the draw to win.

Got about a 40% chance of winning if based on the appointment of judges

Does this help?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_35

This is the one phrase that sets me off in legalese,
"the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance"
The word "exceptional" is so subjective, the local Hawaii police chiefs deny
you the right of self protection and other liberals use
it to deny you many other rights,
because they don't think your problem is
"exceptional".
Or if it is a political issue like gun magazine capacity
then it becomes "exceptional".
Bull schiff!

This is the one phrase that sets me off in legalese,
"the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance"
The word "exceptional" is so subjective, the local Hawaii police chiefs deny
you the right of self protection and other liberals use
it to deny you many other rights,
because they don't think your problem is
"exceptional".
Or if it is a political issue like gun magazine capacity
then it becomes "exceptional".
Bull schiff!

Trying to support the issue as one of "exceptional importance" based on empirical, scientific, statistical and/or demonstrably important facts as they relate to public safety is going to be impossible.

Too many jurisdictions have no such limits, and there is no proven relationship between mag capacities and violence.

Mag capacities for police are based on manufacturer specs.  That standard should be applied to the public as well.

"High Capacity" mags are in common use by the population.  That meets one of the standards set for determining if a firearm/component is protected by the 2A.

Any limits must be set based on some sort of rational justification.  All mag limits are arbitrary and unsupported by any rational factors.  Why is 10 rds better than 15?  Why is 10 better than 30?  Why is not 5 better?  or 7?  or 12?  There's no reasonable justification for the number being set.  Therefore, to argue that these limits will "save lives" is rhetorical at best.

Any hypothetical benefits of mag limits placed on those who would use these weapons for criminal acts are more than offset by the benefit of these higher capacity mags in the hands of law abiding gun owners who rely on them to protect lives and property.  Their needs are no different than the needs of law enforcement when facing a threat.

The 9th circuit has, in addition to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, its own modifications and interpretations to those rules.  The textual modifications can be found at the following link.  Interpretations of those rules are buried in the hundreds of thousands of published opinions in this circuit.  https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/rules/

Much more information regarding the en banc procedures can be found in the General Orders -> https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/rules/general_orders.php

The short version is it will take a majority of the active 9th circuit court of appeals judges to vote in favor of granting the en banc petition for it to be granted.  A non-vote counts as a "No" vote.  The Chief Judge for this circuit is also the en banc coordinator.  He can shorten or lengthen the timeline as he sees fit which means there is no way of knowing how long it will take to make the decision.