Gulf Restoration Network, Inc., et al v. Ken Salazar, et al

Filing

PUBLISHED OPINION FILED also filed in 10-60417 c/w 10-60468, 10-60475, 10-60483, 10-60488, 10-60489, 10-60490, 10-60491, 10-60496 & 10-60500. [10-60411 Dismissed 10-60413 Dismissed 10-60414 Dismissed 10-60415 Dismissed 10-60416 Dismissed ] Judge: PEH , Judge: JLD , Judge: ECP Mandate pull date is 07/23/2012; granting motion to dismiss appeal filed by Respondents Ken Salazar, Ms. Wilma Lewis and Mr. Michael R. Bromwich [6917780-2] in 10-60411; mooting motion for judicial notice filed by Petitioners Sierra Club, Inc. and Gulf Restoration Network, Inc. [6770898-2], mooting motion for judicial notice filed by Respondents Ken Salazar, Ms. Wilma Lewis and Mr. Michael R. Bromwich [6770074-2], mooting motion for judicial notice filed by Petitioners Sierra Club, Inc. and Gulf Restoration Network, Inc. [6768620-2], mooting motion for judicial notice filed by Intervenors United States Oil & Gas Association, International Association of Drilling Contractors, Independent Petroleum Association of America and American Petroleum Institute [6766810-3], mooting motion for judicial notice filed by Intervenor Chevron USA, Inc. [6766357-2], mooting motion for judicial notice filed by Petitioners Sierra Club, Inc. and Gulf Restoration Network, Inc. [6682956-2]; mooting motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Petitioners Sierra Club, Inc. and Gulf Restoration Network, Inc. [6770898-3], mooting motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Petitioners Sierra Club, Inc. and Gulf Restoration Network, Inc. [6768620-3], mooting motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Intervenors United States Oil & Gas Association, International Association of Drilling Contractors, Independent Petroleum Association of America and American Petroleum Institute [6766810-2]; denying motion dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction filed by Intervenors United States Oil & Gas Association, International Association of Drilling Contractors, Independent Petroleum Association of America, Chevron USA, Inc. and American Petroleum Institute, Intervenors United States Oil & Gas Association, International Association of Drilling Contractors, Independent Petroleum Association of America, Mariner Energy Inc, Chevron USA, Inc. and American Petroleum Institute [6632376-2] [10-60411, 10-60413, 10-60414, 10-60415, 10-60416]

Download PDF
Case: 10-60411 Document: 00511871770 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/30/2012 United States Court of Appeals FIFTH CIRCUIT OFFICE OF THE CLERK LYLE W. CAYCE CLERK TEL. 504-310-7700 600 S. MAESTRI PLACE NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 May 30, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL OR PARTIES LISTED BELOW Regarding: Fifth Circuit Statement on Petitions for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc Nos. 10-60411 c/w 10-60413, 10-60414, 10-60415, 10-60416, Gulf Restoration Network, Inc., et al v. Ken Salazar, et al USDC No. S-07409 USDC No. S-07399 USDC No. N-09481 USDC No. N-09483 USDC No. S-07387 --------------------------------------------------Enclosed is a copy of the court's decision. The court has entered judgment under FED. R. APP. P. 36. (However, the opinion may yet contain typographical or printing errors which are subject to correction.) FED. R. APP. P. 39 through 41, and 5TH CIR. RULES 35, 39, and 41 govern costs, rehearings, and mandates. 5TH CIR. RULES 35 and 40 require you to attach to your petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc an unmarked copy of the court's opinion or order. Please read carefully the Internal Operating Procedures (IOP's) following FED. R. APP. P. 40 and 5TH CIR. R. 35 for a discussion of when a rehearing may be appropriate, the legal standards applied and sanctions which may be imposed if you make a nonmeritorious petition for rehearing en banc. Direct Criminal Appeals. 5TH CIR. R. 41 provides that a motion for a stay of mandate under FED. R. APP. P. 41 will not be granted simply upon request. The petition must set forth good cause for a stay or clearly demonstrate that a substantial question will be presented to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, this court may deny the motion and issue the mandate immediately. Pro Se Cases. If you were unsuccessful in the district court and/or on appeal, and are considering filing a petition for certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, you do not need to file a motion for stay of mandate under FED. R. APP. P. 41. The issuance of the mandate does not affect the time, or your right, to file with the Supreme Court. The judgment entered provides that petitioners pay to respondents the costs on appeal. Case: 10-60411 Document: 00511871770 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/30/2012 Sincerely, LYLE W. CAYCE, Clerk By:_________________________ Rhonda M. Flowers, Deputy Clerk Enclosure(s) Mr. John Emad Arbab Ms. Alisa Ann Coe Mr. Charles J. Engel III Mr. David G. Guest Mr. Eric H Holder Jr. Mr. Douglas C. Longman Jr. Mr. Ashley Charles Parrish Ms. Monica K Reimer Ms. Tracey Maria Robertson Ms. Carmen Marie Rodriguez Mr. Steven Joseph Rosenbaum Mr. Sambhav Nott Sankar Mr. David C. Shilton Mr. Reginald Ross Smith Mr. Joel R Waltzer Mr. Robert Baxter Wiygul

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?