Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Winter

NRDC v. Winter · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · February 19, 2008 · No. No. 08-55054

Summary

The Ninth Circuit denied the Navy’s emergency motion for a partial stay of a preliminary injunction governing Navy training exercises off Southern California. The court denied the motion without prejudice because it had expedited review of the underlying preliminary injunction and expected to decide the appeal before the exercises began.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Betty B. Fletcher; Dorothy W. Nelson; Stephen Reinhardt
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
February 19, 2008
Docket number
No. 08-55054
Procedural posture
The Navy appealed the district court's preliminary injunction and sought an emergency partial stay pending appeal.
Standard of review
The court compared the stay factors with the preliminary-injunction factors and elected to address the merits of the preliminary injunction directly rather than separately reviewing the stay request.
Precedential value
Published Ninth Circuit order; precedential status is not otherwise specified in the supplied text.
Parties
Donald C. Winter, Secretary of the Navy, United States Department of the Navy, Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary of the Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Services, William Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., Administrator of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., The International Fund for Animal Welfare, Cetacean Society International, League for Coastal Protection, Ocean Futures Society, Jean-Michel Cousteau
Disposition
writ_denied

Topics

appellate procedureinterlocutory appealenvironmental impact reviewenvironmental lawequitable relief

Practice areas

Environmental lawAppellate procedureRemediesMilitary law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Ninth Circuit should grant the Navy's emergency motion for a partial stay of the district court's preliminary injunction pending appeal.
  2. Whether the court should decide the stay motion separately or instead proceed directly to expedited review of the merits of the preliminary injunction.

Holdings

  1. The Navy's emergency motion for a partial stay was denied without prejudice because the expedited schedule would permit the court to decide the underlying appeal before the Navy's exercises began, eliminating the immediate need for a stay.

Key quotations

For the reasons stated above, the Navy’s emergency motion for a partial stay of the preliminary injunction is DENIED without prejudice to renewal if this court’s decision is delayed beyond March 3, 2008. (1584)

Factual background

The Navy planned training exercises off the coast of Southern California beginning in early to mid-March 2008, with additional exercises scheduled through January 2009. The Navy contended that the preliminary injunction would prevent it from adequately conducting those exercises and sought a partial stay. The opinion noted uncertainty about whether a newly scheduled exercise had been addressed in the Navy's environmental assessment and observed that conducting two exercises simultaneously could have greater cumulative environmental effects than estimated.

Procedural history

The district court imposed a preliminary injunction by orders dated January 3 and January 10, 2008. It denied the Navy's application to vacate or partially stay the injunction on February 4 and lifted a temporary partial stay previously imposed on January 17. The Ninth Circuit expedited the underlying appeal and denied the Navy's emergency motion for a partial stay without prejudice to renewal if the court had not decided the merits by March 3, 2008.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…