PUC OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA V FERC
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AUG 31 2006
CATHY A. CATTERSON, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; et al., Petitioners, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent. BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION; et al., Petitioners, v.
Nos. 01-71051, 01-71321, 01-71544, 02-70254, 02-70266, 02-70275, 02-70282, 02-70285, 02-70301, 02-72113, 03-73887, 03-74252, 03-74527, 03-74531, 03-74594, 04-73501. (Scope/Transaction Cases)
Nos. 02-70262, 02-70270, 02-70274, 02-70294, 03-70185. (Jurisdiction Cases)
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent.
Before: THOMAS, Circuit Judge An amended opinion has been filed contemporaneously with this Order. The amended opinion was filed in response to requests for correction of certain portions of the factual recitation of the case. Objections were filed to some of the requests on the basis that the proposed amendments would affect the substance of the prior opinion. After examining the requests, the panel agreed that some amendments were appropriate to correct the factual record and prevent subsequent misinterpretation of portions of the prior opinion. Therefore, rather than defer the requests until consideration of petitions for rehearing, we believed that some corrections should be made promptly. The panel has deferred taking action on some of the other requests until it considers any petitions for rehearing. In sum, the amended opinion does not contain any changes to the substance of the holdings. It only contains corrections to the factual record and a few other technical corrections. Given that, the previous orders pertaining to the time for filing petitions for rehearing remain in effect, unaltered by the filing of the amended opinion. However, the petitions should reference the corrected amended opinion filed today, rather than the original opinion.
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?