UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner/Appellee/Cross-Appellant,

                                       v.

                      Frank S. ZOLIN, Respondent/Appellee,

                                       and

            Church of Scientology of California and Mary Sue Hubbard,

                     Intervenors/Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

                             Nos. 85-6065, 85-6105.

                         United States Court of Appeals,

                                 Ninth Circuit.

                                  July 5, 1988.



  Before BROWNING, TANG, PREGERSON, ALARCON, NORRIS, REINHARDT, BEEZER,

 BRUNETTI, THOMPSON and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

  The opinion published at 842 F.2d 1135 is amended to include the

 following concurrence:



  NORRIS, Circuit Judge, concurring in the result:

  I write separately to make it clear that I believe the independent evidence

 rule has been and should continue to be the law of the circuit.  See United

 States v. Shewfelt, 455 F.2d 836 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944, 92

 S.Ct. 2042, 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972).  However, I cannot join the court's order

 because the majority has failed to make clear whether the order is a

 disposition on the merits, i.e., whether it constitutes en banc authority that

 the Shewfelt independent evidence rule is the law of the circuit.  If the

 order is intended to be a disposition on the merits, it is internally

 inconsistent because an en banc panel cannot both decide a case on the merits

 and vacate as improvidently granted the order *611 of the full court

 authorizing it to decide the case.