Legal Opinion
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service
District Court, N.D. California
Decided May 29, 2015No. Case No. 13-cv-03717-NCPublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER VACATING INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMITS, BIOLOGICAL OPINION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT; AND DENYING MOTION FOR INJUNCTION
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS, United States Magistrate Judge
Having determined that the defendant agencies improperly issued incidental take permits for two threatened species, the Court now considers the appropriate remedy. Vacatur is the standard remedy for unlawful agency decisions. To be sure, the Ninth Circuit does not mandate that district courts mechanically vacate an agency’s action after a finding that it violates the Administrative Procedure Act. Yet courts within…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Alliance for Wild Rockies v. CottrellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Olsen v. MapesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Amer Bioscience Inc v. Thompson, Tommy G.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2001
- Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida v. VenemanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2002
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Arcsoft, Inc. v. Cyberlink Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- California v. United States Bureau of Land ManagementDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2017
- Becerra v. United States Department of the InteriorDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2017
- Aqualliance v. U.S. Bureau of ReclamationDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2018
- ASSE International, Inc. v. KerryDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2016
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.