Su v. Cactus Canyon

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: August 30, 2024
• Docket: 24-50031
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 24-50031 Document: 34-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/30/2024

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED August 30, 2024 No. 24-50031 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ____________

Julie A. Su, Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Cactus Canyon Quarries, Incorporated; Jack Andy Carson,

Defendants—Appellants.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:23-CV-1147 ______________________________

Before Jones, Smith, and Dennis, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Plaintiff-Appellee Julie A. Su, Acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor (the “Secretary”) sued Defendants-Appellants Cactus Canyon Quarries, Inc. and its president and controller Jack Andy Carson (collectively, “Cactus Canyon”), seeking to enjoin Cactus Canyon from

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 24-50031 Document: 34-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/30/2024

No. 24-50031

interfering with statutorily mandated inspections. The Secretary moved for a preliminary injunction, which the district court granted. Cactus Canyon appealed from the preliminary injunction entry. On January 1, 2024, while this appeal was pending, the preliminary injunction expired and was not extended by the district court. The parties agree this appeal is moot on that basis, and no party argues that an exception to mootness applies. See Yates v. Collier, 677 F. App’x 915, 917 (5th Cir. 2017). Furthermore, Cactus Canyon has not carried its burden of demonstrating an “equitable entitlement to the extraordinary remedy of vacatur.” See Staley v. Harris Cnty., 485 F.3d 305, 310, 314 (5th Cir. 2007) (quoting U.S. Bancorp Mortg. Co. v. Bonner Mall P’ship, 513 U.S. 18, 26 (1994)). Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction.