
    Joyce RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. LUKE’S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL; Dr. Branislav Radovancevic; O. Howard Frazier, M.D.; Surgical Associates of Texas, P.A.; University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston; Baylor College of Medicine; Texas Heart Institute; and Edward K. Massin, M.D., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 97-20948.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 15, 1999.
    Jim M. Perdue, Sr., Jim Mac Perdue, Jr. (argued), Houston, TX, for Riley.
    Douglas N. Letter (argued), U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civ. Div., App. Staff, Washington, DC, for Intervenor.
    L. Boyd Smith, Jr., Michael Warren Mengis, Kathryn Lynn Hays, Gary W. Ei-land, Vinson & Elkins, Houston, TX, for St. Luke’s Hosp., Branislav Radovancevic and Texas Heart Institute.
    Solace Kirkland Southwick, Raina Spiel-man Newsome, Jeffrey B. McClure, May- or, Day, Caldwell & Keeton, Houston, TX, for Frazier and Surgical Associates of Texas, PA.
    Toni B. Hunter (argued), Austin, TX, for The University of Texas Houston Health Science Center.
    William Joseph Boyce (argued), Warren S. Huang, Fulbright & Jaworski, Houston, TX, Martin H. Redish, Northwestern University School of Law, Chicago, IL, for Baylor College of Medicine.
    Brian Patrick Johnson, Hanen, Alexander, Johnson & Spalding, Houston, TX, for Massin.
    Brian Stuart Koukoutchos, Bedford, MA, Lisa R. Hovelson, Alan Marc Shuster-man, Taxpayers Against Fraud, The False Claims Act Legal Center, Washington, DC, for Taxpayers Against Fraud, The False Claims Act Legal Center, Amicus Curiae.
    Cathy M. Ventrell-Monsees, American Ass’n of Retired Persons, Washington, DC, for American Ass’n of Retired Persons, Nat. Health Law' Program, Project on Government Oversight and Accountability Project, Amicus Curiae.
    Dorothy Marie Siemon, Bruce B. Vig-nery, Michael Robert Schuster, American Ass’n of Retired Persons, Washington, DC, for American Ass’n of Retired Persons, Amicus Curiae.
    James B. Helmer, Jr., Frederick Mason Morgan, Jr., Helmer, Lugbill, Martins & Morgan, Cincinnati, OH, for Nat. Employment Lawyers Ass’n, Amicus Curiae.
    Paul D. Kamenar, Daniel J. Popeo, Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, DC, Evan Slavitt, Lisa Tucker McEl-roy, Gadsby & Hannah, Boston, MA, for Washington Legal Foundation, Amicus Curiae.
    Donald Baxter Craven, Washington, DC, Alan I. Horowitz, Clarence T. Kipps, Miller & Chevalier Chartered, Robin S. Conrad, David Thomas Deal, Washington, DC, for Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America and American Petroleum Institute, Amicus Curiae.
    Stephen P. Murphy, Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, Washington, DC, for American Health Care Ass’n (AHCA), Amicus Curiae.
    Ray M. Aragon, C. Stanley Dees, McKenna & Cuneo, Washington, DC, Herbert L. Fenster, McKenna & Cuneo, Denver, CO, Barbara Jean Bacon, McKenna & Cuneo, Los Angeles, CA, Gregory Thomas Jaeger, McKenna & Cuneo, Arlington, VA, for Aerospace Industries Ass’n of America, American Hosp. Ass’n, Electronic Industries Alliance, Nat. Defense Industrial Ass’n, and Professional Services Council, Amicus Curiae.
    Jack R. Bierig, Sidley & Austin, Chicago, IL, Andrew E. Weis, Sidley & Austin, Washington, DC, for American Medical Ass’n and The Ass’n of American Medical Colleges, Amicus Curiae.
    
      Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
    
    
      
       Chief Judge King is recused and did not participate in this matter.
    
   BY THE COURT:

The internal policies of this court require the pre-circulation, to all non-re-cused active judges, of a proposed panel opinion that will create a circuit split. Those policies also allow any active judge to request, before the opinion is issued, a poll on whether the case should be reheard en banc after the opinion is issued.

A member of the court in regular active service having requested a poll pursuant to that policy, and a majority of the judges in regular’ active service having voted in favor of granting rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.  