After a panel decision, a party may petition for rehearing by the panel or for rehearing by the full court. Both are granted infrequently, and both have defined purposes that petitions routinely ignore.

Panel rehearing is for a point of law or fact the court has overlooked or misapprehended — a misread record citation, an argument not addressed, an intervening decision. It is not for reargument, and a petition that simply repeats the brief is denied without discussion.

En banc rehearing is reserved for conflict with a decision of the same court or of the supreme court, or for questions of exceptional importance. The petition must open by stating which ground is invoked, and the strongest ones identify a genuine intra-circuit conflict with citations.

Effect on timing. A timely petition suspends the finality of the judgment and the mandate does not issue until it is resolved, which also affects the period for seeking further review.

Cost of filing. Beyond fees and time, a petition invites a revised opinion. Panels sometimes amend in ways that strengthen the result against the petitioner.

Realistic assessment. These petitions are worth filing where a published opinion creates a rule with consequences beyond the case, and rarely worth filing solely because the outcome was wrong.