Legal Opinion
Oceana, Inc. v. Pritzker
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 31, 2015No. Civil Action No. 2012-0041PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, United States . District Judge
Oceana, Inc. challenges a Biological Opinion issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service- (“NMFS”), in which NMFS has determined that the combined operation of seven fisheries is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Northwest Atlantic Distinct Population Segment of loggerhead sea turtles. Oceana contends that the Biological Opinion is arbitrary > and capricious and therefore seeks its vacatur. NMFS responds-that its scientific judgment is entitled to deference. Both sides have filed motions for summary.-judgment.…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Appalachian Voices v. US Department of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2022
- Sierra Club v. JewellDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Center for Biological Diversity v. Andrew WheelerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2024
- Center for Biological Diversity v. Andrew WheelerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2024
- Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2023
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.