SIERRA CLUB v. JOHNSON

Filing 66

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying as moot EPA's motion to close these consolidated cases. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on February 19, 2016. (MA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
)
GINA McCARTHY, Administrator,
)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
)
)
Defendant.
)
___________________________________ )
SIERRA CLUB,

Civil Action No. 01-1537 (PLF)
(consolidated with
Civil Action No. 01-1548
Civil Action No. 01-1558
Civil Action No. 01-1569
Civil Action No. 01-1578
Civil Action No. 01-1582
Civil Action No. 01-1597)

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Environmental Protection Agency
(“EPA”)’s notice of completion and motion to close these consolidated cases [Dkt. 176]. In an
Order dated July 14, 2015, the Court determined that it would treat EPA’s notice “as a motion
requesting the closure of these consolidated cases.” ORDER at 2 (July 14, 2015) [Dkt. 180].
Sierra Club opposes the motion [Dkt. 177]. 1 Upon consideration of the parties’ arguments, the
relevant legal authorities, and pertinent portions of the record, the Court will deny EPA’s motion
as moot.
This Court’s most recent opinion summarized the procedural history of this case.
See Sierra Club v. McCarthy, 61 F. Supp. 3d 35, 37-39 (D.D.C. 2014). EPA now moves to close
1

The papers considered in connection with the pending issues include EPA’s
Notice of Completion of Required Action and Resolution of Claim for Costs of Litigation
(“Mot.”) [Dkt. 176]; Response of Sierra Club to EPA’s Notice of Completion of Required Action
[Dkt. 177]; EPA’s Opposition to Sierra Club’s Request That the Court Retain Jurisdiction Over
This Matter [Dkt. 181]; Sierra Club’s Sur-Reply in Opposition to EPA’s Motion For Closure of
the Cases [Dkt. 184]; and Sierra Club’s Notice of Filing of Petition for Review [185].

these consolidated cases because, on June 3, 2015, it issued a notice stating that it had fulfilled its
duty to promulgate a final rule containing the emissions standards required under Clean Air Act
Section 112(c)(6). See Mot. at 1 (citing 80 Fed. Reg. 31,470 (June 3, 2015)). Subsequent to
EPA’s motion, Sierra Club filed a petition for review of the merits of EPA’s final rule in the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, see Dkt. 185 at 1, and that
case is currently pending.
EPA fails to recognize that this Court entered final judgment under Rule 58 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 4(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure in
favor of Sierra Club and terminated these consolidated cases on March 31, 2006. ORDER at 4
(March 31, 2006) [Dkt. 80]. The Court’s jurisdiction in subsequent proceedings in this case
stems from its authority to enforce that Order. See, e.g., Sierra Club v. McCarthy, 61 F. Supp.
3d at 39 (“‘District courts have the authority to enforce the terms of their mandates.’” (quoting
Flaherty v. Pritzker, 17 F. Supp. 3d 52, 55 (D.D.C. 2014))). The Court therefore will deny
EPA’s motion to close these consolidated cases as moot. The case already is closed.
For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby
ORDERED that EPA’s motion to close these consolidated cases [Dkt. 176] is
DENIED as moot.
SO ORDERED.

/s/
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN
United States District Judge
DATE: February 19, 2016

2