Scribd
Upload
57 views3 pages

PPM191 277 Order 12-10-2010

This order from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denies motions to stay EPA rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The order grants other procedural motions. It concludes petitioners have not met the high bar required for a stay by failing to show alleged harms from the EPA rules are certain to directly result from the agency actions petitioners seek to enjoin. The cases will be scheduled for consolidated oral argument before the same three-judge panel.

Uploaded by

Heather M. Handley Goldstone
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
57 views3 pages

PPM191 277 Order 12-10-2010

This order from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denies motions to stay EPA rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The order grants other procedural motions. It concludes petitioners have not met the high bar required for a stay by failing to show alleged harms from the EPA rules are certain to directly result from the agency actions petitioners seek to enjoin. The cases will be scheduled for consolidated oral argument before the same three-judge panel.

Uploaded by

Heather M. Handley Goldstone
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Case: 09-1322 Document: 1282558 Filed: 12/10/2010 Page: 1

United States Court of Appeals


F OR T HE D ISTRICT OF C OLUMBIA C IRCUIT
____________
No. 09-1322 September Term 2010
EPA-74FR66496
EPA-75FR49556
Filed On: December 10, 2010
Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc., et al.,

Petitioners

v.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Respondent
------------------------------
Consolidated with 10-1024, 10-1025, 10-1026,
10-1030, 10-1035, 10-1036, 10-1037, 10-1038,
10-1039, 10-1040, 10-1041, 10-1042, 10-1044,
10-1045, 10-1046, 10-1234, 10-1235, 10-1239,
10-1245, 10-1281, 10-1310, 10-1318, 10-1319,
10-1320, 10-1321
__________________

No. 10-1073

Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc., et al.,

Petitioners

v.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Respondent
------------------------------
Consolidated with 10-1083, 10-1099, 10-1109,
10-1110, 10-1114, 10-1115, 10-1118, 10-1119,
10-1120, 10-1122, 10-1123, 10-1124, 10-1125,
10-1126, 10-1127, 10-1128, 10-1129, 10-1131,
10-1132, 10-1145, 10-1147, 10-1148, 10-1199,
10-1200, 10-1201, 10-1202, 10-1203, 10-1205,
10-1206, 10-1207, 10-1208, 10-1209, 10-1210,
10-1211, 10-1212, 10-1213, 10-1215, 10-1216,
10-1218, 10-1219, 10-1220, 10-1221, 10-1222
Case: 09-1322 Document: 1282558 Filed: 12/10/2010 Page: 2

United States Court of Appeals


F OR T HE D ISTRICT OF C OLUMBIA C IRCUIT
____________
No. 09-1322 September Term 2010

__________________

No. 10-1092

Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc., et al.,

Petitioners

v.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Respondent
------------------------------
Consolidated with 10-1094, 10-1134, 10-1143,
10-1144, 10-1152, 10-1156, 10-1158, 10-1159,
10-1160, 10-1161, 10-1162, 10-1163, 10-1164,
10-1166, 10-1172, 10-1182

BEFORE: Ginsburg, Tatel, and Brown, Circuit Judges

ORDER

Upon consideration of the motions to stay, the response thereto, and the replies;
the motion for leave to file a response, the opposition thereto, and the reply; the motion
for leave to file declarations under seal; the motion to file a sur-reply, the response
thereto, and the reply; the motion for coordination of related cases, the responses
thereto, and the reply; and the Rule 28(j) letters and responses thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion for leave to file a response be granted. The Clerk is
directed to file the lodged response of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States
of America. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to file declarations under seal be granted.
It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to file a sur-reply be granted. The Clerk is
directed to file the lodged sur-reply. It is

Page 2
Case: 09-1322 Document: 1282558 Filed: 12/10/2010 Page: 3

United States Court of Appeals


F OR T HE D ISTRICT OF C OLUMBIA C IRCUIT
____________
No. 09-1322 September Term 2010

FURTHER ORDERED that the motions to stay be denied. Petitioners have not
satisfied the stringent standards required for a stay pending court review. See
Washington Metro. Area Transit Comm’n v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841, 843
(D.C. Cir. 1977); D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures 32 (2010).
Specifically, with regard to each of the challenged rules, petitioners have not shown that
the harms they allege are “certain,” rather than speculative, or that the “alleged harm[s]
will directly result from the action[s] which the movant[s] seeks to enjoin.” Wisconsin
Gas Co. v. FERC, 758 F.2d 669, 674 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (per curiam). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that these cases be scheduled for oral argument on the
same day before the same panel.

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:


Mark J. Langer, Clerk

BY: /s/
Ken R. Meadows
Deputy Clerk

Page 3

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy