Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

STATE v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, 2:15-cv-2467. (2016)

Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio Number: infdco20160414806 Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 21, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 21, 2016
Summary: ORDER EDMUND A. SARGUS, Jr. , Chief District Judge . On February 22, 2016, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the Sixth Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction to review challenges to the Clean Water Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015). ( See ECF No. 48-1.) Citing the Sixth Circuit's February 22 decision, Defendants have moved to dismiss the action currently pending before this Court. ( See ECF No. 50.) The February 22 decision is binding on
More

ORDER

On February 22, 2016, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the Sixth Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction to review challenges to the Clean Water Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015). (See ECF No. 48-1.) Citing the Sixth Circuit's February 22 decision, Defendants have moved to dismiss the action currently pending before this Court. (See ECF No. 50.)

The February 22 decision is binding on this Court. The mandate has not yet been issued by the Sixth Circuit. And in light of the Sixth Circuit's recent order to shorten the deadline by which the parties must file petitions for en banc review, the mandate for this case might not issue for some time. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(d)(1). Accordingly, the Court STAYS all proceedings in this case until the mandate from the Sixth Circuit finally issues.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer