Did the Ninth Circuit err in failing to rule on whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Petitioner's Motion to Stay the Second Summary Judgment proceedings when the Ninth Circuit decision was based on flagerant misreading of the trial record?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Petitioners, Andrew J.J. Wolf and R. Hans Kruger, filed a Motion to Stay Second . Summary Judgment based upon the fact defendants counsel had chose to utilize . a portion of Petitioner Kruger's Deposition Transcript. Petitioners sought the district court under Rule 106, F.R.E., to order defendants to provide the entire transcript in order to meet the doctrine of completenese in Rule 106 so they could properly defend the Second Summary Judgment Motion that was pending before the district court. The district court denied the motion to stay and subsequently granted the summary judgmnet without giving the Petitioner's a full and fair oportunity to properly respond to the second summary judgment motion, The petitioner's presented this issue on appeal with the Ninth Circuit with the court not ruling on the issue at all. They sought rehearing and rehearing en banc with the Ninth Circit again not ruling on the matter. The case thus presents the following question. Did the Ninth Circuit err in failing to rule on whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Petitioner's Motion to Stay the Second Summary Judgment proceedings when the Ninth Circuit decision was based on flagerant misreading of the trial record? i