Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton

D.C. Circuit

Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton

74 F. App'x 63

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedSeptember 2, 2003

DocketNos. 00-5377, 00-5378, 00-5390, 00-5397, 00-5399

StatusPublished

This text of 74 F. App'x 63 (Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, 74 F. App'x 63 (D.C. Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the district court’s order entered March 31, 2003, denying plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and granting defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment; the district court’s order entered June 4, 2003, denying plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration; and the expiration of the time for filing a notice of appeal on August 4, 2003, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), without any such notice being filed, it is hereby

ORDERED that this appeal from the order of the district court denying appel[64]*64lants leave to intervene as of right be dismissed as moot.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the district court’s order entered March 31, 2003, denying plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and granting defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment; the district court’s order entered June 4, 2003, denying plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration; and the expiration of the time for filing a notice of appeal on August 4, 2003, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), without any such notice being filed, it is hereby

ORDERED that this appeal from the order of the district court denying appel[64]*64lants leave to intervene as of right be dismissed as moot.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 F. App'x 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/defenders-of-wildlife-v-norton-cadc-2003.