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.