San Diego Sheriff's office decides not to go for an "en banc" appeal of the recent Appeals Court decision striking down part of California's Concealed Carry law

The press release from the Sheriff's office reads this way (2/21/2014 2:46:13 PM):

Today, San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore notified the County Board of Supervisors ofhis intention not to seek en banc review in the matter Peruta, et.al v. County of San Diego. Acopy of Sheriff Gore's letter to the Board of Supervisors is below. 

Members of the public wishing to obtain a CCW under the standards articulated by the Ninth Circuit should be aware that the decision has not yet become final. Federal court rules prescribe a period of time which must elapse before the case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings. Should the decision of the Ninth Circuit become final, the Sheriff's Department will begin to issue CCWs in situations where the applicant has met all other lawful qualifications and has requested a CCW for purposes of self-defense. 

Additionally, those seeking a CCW are advised that the process for obtaining a CCW involves several steps. The application process includes a scheduled interview, payment of fees, as well as state and local background checks. Successful completion of a firearms course of training is also required. This process can take several months. . . . 

So what does this mean?  I discussed last week, the Appeals Court decision struck down the so-called “good cause” requirement for getting a permit, saying that concern for one’s personal safety should be sufficient justification.  I thought that there was a chance that the decision wouldn't be challenged because a win by gun control advocates at the Ninth Circuit would surely lead to an appeal to the Supreme Court.  If I had a choice of cases, the California case is the one that I would appeal simply because some counties in California are so incredibly restrictive on issuing permits.  It seems that gun control advocates may have won out on influencing the legal strategy here.

Meanwhile, Orange County, California has responded by loosening up its permitting requirements.  The Los Angeles Times reports:

But Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens announced on the department's website that the county has decided to comply anyway.
"Regardless of what her personal positions are, she feels she needs to abide by what the law is," Lt. Jeff Hallock, a sheriff spokesman, said Thursday.
He said the department has received "a huge influx" of requests for permits to carry concealed guns since the 9th Circuit ruling. He cautioned, though, that the new relaxed rules might be "revisited" if the court decision is appealed or overturned.
The Orange County Sheriff's Department, which handles gun carry permits for the county's cities, will now give residents permits if they simply cite a need for personal safety or self-defense, as long as other conditions are met, the department said. Those conditions include an interview, background check, completion of a firearms training course and a fee.
"I am thrilled that the sheriff has seen the writing on the wall and recognized that Orange County citizens should have the right to choose to carry a firearm to protect themselves," said Chuck Michel, a National Rifle Assn. lawyer who represented gun owners in the 9th Circuit case. . . .