Climate United Fund v. Citibank, N.A.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
• Decided: April 16, 2025
• Docket: 25-5122
• Status: Published

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5122 September Term, 2024 1:25-cv-00698-TSC Filed On: April 16, 2025 Climate United Fund, et al.,

Appellees

v.

Citibank, N.A.,

Appellee

Environmental Protection Agency and Lee M. Zeldin, in his official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Appellants

BEFORE: Pillard, Katsas, and Rao*, Circuit Judges

ORDER

Upon consideration of the emergency motion for stay pending appeal, which includes a request for an immediate administrative stay, it is

ORDERED that the district court’s April 15, 2025, order granting a preliminary injunction be administratively stayed in part, pending further order of the court. The district court’s order is stayed insofar as it (1) enables or requires Citibank to release,

* Circuit Judge Rao would administratively stay the district court's order in full, at least until the district court issues its opinion. Injunctive relief is “an extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief.” Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 22 (2008). A preliminary injunction entered without reasoning does not meet that standard. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5122 September Term, 2024

disburse, transfer, otherwise move, or allow access to funds and (2) requires defendants to file a status report with the district court within 24 hours of the entry of the preliminary injunction. It is further

ORDERED that no party take any action, directly or indirectly, with regard to the disputed contracts, grants, awards or funds.

The purpose of this order is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the district court’s forthcoming opinion in support of its order granting a preliminary injunction together with the emergency motion for stay pending appeal and any response thereto, and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion. See D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures 33 (2024). A separate order setting deadlines for responses to, and a reply in support of, the emergency motion for stay pending appeal will be issued at a later time.

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT: Clifton B. Cislak, Clerk

BY: /s/

Scott H. Atchue Deputy Clerk

Page 2