Continental Airlines, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Transportation
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1DissentGarth, Senior Circuit Judge
I cannot agree with the majority’s analysis, and hence, I dissent from its holding which directs the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) to conform to the stringent time limits of § 401(c)(2)(B) — time limits which have no application by statute, purpose or reason to a § 408 “merger-condition.”
I
In this case, United Airlines has been permitted to acquire the Pacific routes of Pan Am, subject to the condition, however, that if DOT deemed in a future proceeding that the public’s interest would be served *264by authorizing another U.S. flag carrier to provide service, that United would be required…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- National Labor Relations Board v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 23Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Montana Power Co. v. Federal Power CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.