ORDER
The Supreme Court recently reversed the judgment in this case, and remanded it to this court for further proceedings. Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 594 U.S. ––––, 141 S.Ct. 2063, ––– L.Ed.2d –––– (2021).
We previously affirmed the district courts dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claim for failure to state a claim under either the Fifth or Fourth Amendments. Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma, 923 F.3d 524, 526–27 (9th Cir. 2019). Plaintiffs petitioned for certiorari on the Fifth Amendment claim. The Supreme Court held that the access regulation, California Code of Regulations, Title 8, § 20900(e), “appropriates a right to invade the growers’ property and therefore constitutes a per se physical taking,” 141 S.Ct. at 2072, and that Plaintiffs’ complaint thus “states a claim for an uncompensated taking in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments,” id. at 2074. In light of the Supreme Courts decision, the judgment of the district court relating to the Fifth Amendment claim is reversed. For the reasons stated in Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma, 923 F.3d at 534–36, the judgment of the district court dismissing the Fourth Amendment claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is affirmed. This matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Courts opinion.
The copy of this order shall act as and for the mandate of this court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.