Helping Hand Tools, et al v. USEPA, et al
||HELPING HAND TOOLS and ROB SIMPSON
||U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, GINA MCCARTHY, in her capacity as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and DEBORAH JORDAN, in her capacity as Director of the Air Division of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX
||August 19, 2014
||U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
|Nature of Suit:
We have the following opinions for this case:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|December 23, 2016
Filed order and amended opinion (SUSAN P. GRABER, RICHARD C. TALLMAN and NANCY G. EDMUNDS). The opinion filed on September 2, 2016, is amended as follows: 1. On page 28 of the slip opinion, The environmental impact report ( EIR ) prepared by EPA . . . is changed to, The environmental impact report ( EIR ) prepared by a consultant for the Shasta County Department of Resource Management . . . 2. On page 28 of the slip opinion, EPA therefore conducted the EIR assuming . . . is changed to, The consultant therefore conducted the EIR assuming . . . 3. On page 30 of the slip opinion, The Bioenergy BACT Guidance EPA applied to the greenhouse gas emissions from Sierra Pacific s new facility is rational and thoroughly consistent with EPA s prior guidance is changed to, The Bioenergy BACT Guidance, as applied by EPA to the greenhouse gas emissions from Sierra Pacific s new facility, is rational and is consistent with EPA s prior practice. With these amendments, the panel has voted to deny Center for Biological Diversity s petition for panel rehearing. Judges Graber and Tallman have voted to deny Helping Hand Tools petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Edmunds so recommends. The full court has been advised of Helping Hand Tools petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. No further petitions for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc will be entertained. IT IS SO ORDERED.; Costs are awarded to Respondents. The petitions for review are DENIED..  [14-72553, 14-72602]
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
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?