Cases

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARGUERITE HIKEN; THE No. 13-17073 MILITARY LAW TASK FORCE, Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. 4:06-cv-02812-YGR v. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; OPINION UNITED STATES CENTRAL COMMAND, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United State

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 15, 2017 No. 15-50759 Lyle W. Cayce

ORDER OF DISMISSAL These consolidated actions challenging the validity of the “Clean Water Rule,” 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015), having been transferred to this court by the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation; and This court having issued its jurisdictional ruling on February 22, 2016, holding that plaintiffs’ challenges are subject to direct review in this court,

W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-Appellants Defense Distributed and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. have sued Defendants-Appellees, the United States Department of State, the Secretary of State, the DDTC, and various agency employees (collectively, the “State Department”), seeking to enjoin enforcement of certain laws governing the export of unclassified technical da

PRYOR, Circuit Judge: This appeal requires us to decide whether a federal agency may suspend two affiliates of an indicted government contractor for the duration of the legal proceedings against the indicted contractor under the Federal Acquisition Regulation. See 48 C.F.R. § 9.407-4(b) (2012). When an agency suspends a government contractor, the agency may a

654 F.Supp.2d 61 (2009) Rosezola SELLERS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and Robert M. Gates, Secretary of the Department of Defense, Defendants. C.A. No. 05-381 S. United States District Court, D. Rhode Island. July 16, 2009. *65 Louise A. Herman, Patricia E. Andrews, Providence, RI, for Plaintiff. Ly T

442 F.Supp.2d 857 (2006) NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, et al., Defendants. No. CV04-2062GAF(RZX). United States District Court, C.D. California. March 21, 2006. *858 *859 *860 David S. Beckman, Natural

388 F.Supp.2d 1086 (2005) NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, et al., Defendants. No. CV04-2062GAF(RZX). United States District Court, C.D. California. May 25, 2005. *1087 *1088 Aaron Colangelo, Natural Resources Defense Council, Washington, D

613 F.3d 76 (2010) NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, People of the State of California, Ex Rel, Attorney General Bill Lockyer, State of Connecticut, State of Illinois, Consolidated-Plaintiffs-Appellants, State of New York, Consolidated-Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack, of Agriculture, Administrator Cindy Smith, of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service o

OPINION D.W. NELSON, Senior Circuit Judge: This case involves an attempt by ten American citizens (hereinafter Lien Claimants) to collect on valid judgments they hold against the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran) for their injuries arising out of terrorism sponsored by Iran. The Lien Claimants seek to attach a $2.8 million judgment

MEMORANDUM DECISION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES (Doc. 122) OLIVER W. WANGER, District Judge. By motion filed on March 5, 2007, Petitioners moved for an award of attorneys’ fees as prevailing parties pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1). Petitioners seek attorneys fees and costs in the amount of $115,400.60 due to Lewis Bris

241 F.Supp.2d 5 (2003) ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, Defendant. No. CIV.A.02-1233 (JDB) ECF. United States District Court, District of Columbia. January 16, 2003. David L. Sobel, Marc Rotenberg, Washington, DC, for plaintiff. Peter S. Smith, Heather Graham-Oliver, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Washingt

OPINION M. SMITH, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-Appellants Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica Bay-keeper (collectively, the Plaintiffs) file this interlocutory appeal .from the district court’s dismissal of their- claims for injunc-tive relief as moot. We hold that we have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CRAIG WHITLOCK, Plaintiff, Case No. 20-cv-3246 (JMC) v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Craig Whitlock, a reporter for The Washington Post, made thirteen Freedom of Informat

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROGER CHARLES DAY, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 19-3422 (EGS) ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

N.R. Smith, Circuit Judge: The Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") requires federal agencies to make certain agency records "available for public inspection in an electronic format." 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(2). FOIA's judicial-review provision authorizes district courts to enjoin violations of this "reading-room" provision

463 F.Supp.2d 1085 (2006) Lt. Cmdr. Richard T. GENGLER and Lt. Cmdr. Daniel S. McSeveney, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES of America through its DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND NAVY; and Secretary Donald C. Winter, Respondents. No. 1:06CV00362 OWWLJO. United States District Court, E.D. California. November 3, 2006. *1086 Timothy Ross Lor

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE -MOTIONS TO DISMISS (Docs. 1029, 1030, 1031, 1032, 1036). Lawrence J. O’Neill, UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION On April 28, 2016, Plaintiffs, a coalition of environmental interest groups led by the Natural Resources Defense Council, filed the currently operative Fourth Supplemental Complaint (“4SC”), which includes three pre-exist

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 31) WANGER, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Before the court for decision is Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(2), and for failure to state a claim, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). (Doc. 31, filed Aug. 3 2006.) II. BACKGROUND/PR