This is a recycling of the same bogus story from another like publication from over a month ago - “playing telephone” like the MSM does to recycle nonsense and keep a false narrative going. And of course, like always, if you go to the actual opinion, they were ruling on the rationale for the dismissal, not making any final findings of fact, and the section they claim was a “finding” in this and the other article was where they were summarizing the claims made by each of the parties, not stating either were their own findings - that is what a judge does in outlining the facts of a case. In this case, they found the rationale for dismissing the case did not apply, and remanded it back down for further proceedings and it should go to trial.
And there is no such thing as a 4-judge panel that makes rulings at the Courts of Appeal - it is either a 3 judge panel, or the Court hearing it en banc with all members. This author does not know what they are talking about across the board - the headline and content of the article in its entirety is false, right down to the most basic knowledge of how the court is constituted and court procedure.
Opinion by Judge R. Nelson; Concurrence by Judge R. Nelson; Concurrence by Judge Collins; Dissent by Judge Hawkins