Resource Investments v. U.S.

<> Resource Investments v. U.S. - 5/12/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, Case No. Resource Investments, Inc. and Land Recovery, Inc. (collectively, "Resource Investments") appeal the Court of Federal Claims' ("Claims Court") dismissal of their Fifth Amendment takings claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1500. The Appeals Court affirmed the Federal Claims' decision -- "the Claims Court correctly dismissed Resource Investments' complaint as barred by § 1500."

In Re: Deepwater Horizon

<> In Re: Deepwater Horizon - 5/8/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, Case No. 13-31296 c/w Nos. 13-31299, 13-31302. Three consolidated cases related to settlement awards BP paid to nonprofits through its Court-Supervised Settlement Program (CSSP).       The district court denied discretionary review of these three awards and the Appeals Court affirmed the district court ruling.

In Re: Deepwater Horizon

<> In Re: Deepwater Horizon - 5/8/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, Case No. 13-30843. This action involves the Settlement Agreement" approved by the district court on December 21, 2012, between BP Exploration and the certified Economic and Property Damages Class.       The Panel concluded: "In sum, finding that we have jurisdiction over this appeal, we hold that the parties have a right under the Settlement Agreement to appeal claim determinations from the district court to this court. We also hold that the Final Rules violate this right with its lack of docketing provisions providing for a proper appeal to this court, and remand on that basis."

El Comite el Bienestar de Earlimart v. USEPA

<> El Comite el Bienestar de Earlimart v. USEPA - 5/8/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-74184. The panel denied a petition for review brought by several community organizations challenging EPA's 2012 approval of revisions and additions to California's Pesticide Element for its State Implementation Plan under the Clean Air Act, relating to the reduction of volatile organic compounds in the San Joaquin and Ventura air basins; and held that EPA was not arbitrary and capricious in construing the Pesticide Element and approving Fumigant Regulations and the SIP Revision.

Appeals Court Reaffirms Decision that Upheld Program to Reduce Climate Pollution

<> Appeals Court Reaffirms Decision that Upheld Program to Reduce Climate Pollution – 5/4/15. Texas v. EPA. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 10-1425, consolidated with many others.

State of Veracruz v. BP

<> State of Veracruz v. BP - 5/1/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, Case No. 13-31070. In September 2010, three Mexican states (Veracruz, Tamaulipas, and Quintana Roo filed complaints in the Western District of Texas for damages incurred as a result of the BP oil spill.      The Eastern District of Louisiana as part of the Deepwater Horizon multidistrict litigation,  in September 2013 granted summary judgment to the defendants saying the Mexican states did not hold a sufficient "proprietary interest" in the allegedly damaged property. The Appeals Court affirmed the district court decision.

DE Department of Natural Res. v. EPA

<> DE Department of Natural Res. v. EPA – 5/1/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 13-1093. The State of Delaware, industry and environmental organizations, and an industry intervenor challenge a final rule of the Environmental Protection Agency governing the use of Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines ("backup generators" or "emergency engines").      The Appeals Court ruled, ". . .we hold that EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it modified the National Emissions Standards and the Performance Standards to allow backup generators to operate without emissions controls for up to 100 hours per year as part of an emergency demand-response program."