Luminant Generation Company, et al v. EPA


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-60158 Vacated and Remanded] Judge: CDK , Judge: EBC , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 12/17/2012; denying as moot motion to remand case filed by Respondent EPA [7134609-2], denying as moot motion to remand case filed by Petitioners State of Texas and Big Brown Power Company, L.L.C. [7116718-2] [11-60158]

Download PDF
Case: 11-60158 Document: 00512031804 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/24/2012 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 October 24, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL OR PARTIES LISTED BELOW Regarding: Fifth Circuit Statement on Petitions for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc No. 11-60158, Luminant Generation Company, et al v. EPA USDC No. 76 Fed. Reg. 1525 --------------------------------------------------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 each party bear its own costs on appeal. Sincerely, LYLE W. CAYCE, Clerk By:_________________________ Joseph M. Armato, Deputy Clerk Case: 11-60158 Document: 00512031804 Enclosure(s) Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Scott Fulton Philip Stephen Gidiere III Adam Joshua Katz Steven G. McKinney William Arlyn Moore Jon Niermann Harry Max Reasoner John Aloysius Riley Christopher Charles Thiele Eric Alan White Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/24/2012

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?