Here's a good example of how you can -- ostensibly legitimately -- refuse to follow a plethora of prior Ninth Circuit cases that don't go your way. At least when you have the right panel.
When you can "distinguish" cases and hold their various conclusions to be "dicta", you can decide the case the way you want. That way the onus is on the other side to see whether they -- rather than you -- can get enough votes to take the case en banc.
A classic move. This time by Judge Bea.