Administrative
STATE OF ARIZONA et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; BROADWAY-HALE STORES, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; SAFEWAY STORES, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; HOMART DEVELOPMENT CO., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent
526 F.2d 1391·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1975
Before ELY, TRASK and SNEED, Circuit Judges.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
STATE OF ARIZONA et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. BROADWAY-HALE STORES, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. SAFEWAY STORES, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. HOMART DEVELOPMENT CO., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
Nos. 73-3577, 73-3588, 74-1001, 74-1002, 74-1009 and 74-1013.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Dec. 19, 1975.
Patrick Murphy, Asst. Atty. Gen. (argued), Phoenix, Ariz., for petitioner in 73-3577.
Henry C. Thumann (argued), of O’Melveny & Myers, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner in 73 — 3588.
David J. Toomey (argued), New York City, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner in 73-3588.
Michael Graves, Atty. (argued), Lands and Natural Resources Div., U. S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before ELY, TRASK and SNEED, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY]
No Petitioner, pursuant to the request in our Opinion of September 8, 1975, informed this Court within 21 days thereafter of issues other than those dealt with by our September 8, 1975 Opinion which it wished this Court to review. Under these circumstances, it is proper for this Court to dismiss finally these petitions for review. Each party shall bear its own costs. It is so ordered.
Dismissed.