ML091000489
| ML091000489 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 02/04/2009 |
| From: | Curran D Harmon, Curran, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP |
| To: | Catterson C NRC/OGC, US Federal Judiciary, Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit |
| Charles Mullins, 301-415-1618 | |
| References | |
| 08-75058 | |
| Download: ML091000489 (4) | |
Text
Case: 08-75058 02/04/2009 Page: 1 of 4, DktEntry: 6797034 HARMON, CURRAN, SPIELBERG EISENBERG, LLP 1726 M Street, NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036 phone: (202) 328-3500 fax: (202) 328-6918 February 4, 2009 BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE Cathy A. Catterson, Clerk United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 95 Seventh Street San Francisco, CA 94103-1526
Subject:
San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, No. 08-75058
Dear Ms. Catterson:
In preparing the docketing statement for this case, which was filed with San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace's ("SLOMFP's") petition for review on December 12, 2008, I inadvertently failed to identify a related case that is pending in this Court:
Public Citizen and San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, Nos. 07-71868, 07-72555. (That case was consolidated with State of New York ýv. NRC.) The attached amended docketing statement corrects the error.
In addition, I have amended the docketing statement to indicate that as an alternative to the possibility that SLOMFP may seek a stay, SLOMFP may request an expedited decision.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
/s/
Diane Curran Cc:
Service List
Case: 08-75058 02/04/2009 Page: 2 of 4 DktEntry: 6797034 A-I I (rev. 7/00)
Page 1 of 2 USCA DOCKET # (IF KNOWN) 08-75058 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY.
TITLE IN FULL:
DSTRCT :TJUDGE:
DISTRICT COURT NUMBER:
San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. United DATE NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED:
IS THIS A CROSS APPEAL?
States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the IDecember 12, 2008 1
YES United States of America IF THIS MATTER HAS BEEN BEFORE THIS COURT PREVIOUSLY, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DOCKET NUMBER AND CITATION (IF ANY):
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF ACTION AND RESULT BELOW:
Petition for review of an NRC decision to license a spent fuel storage facility at the Diablo Canyon power plant PRINCIPAL ISSUES PROPOSED TO BE RAISED ON APPEAL:
Whether the NRC violated the National Environmental Policy Act and the Atomic Energy Act.
PLEASE IDENTIFY ANY OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDING THAT MAY HAVE A BEARING ON THIS CASE (INCLUDE PENDING DISTRICT COURT POST-JUDGMENT MOTIONS):
This case appeals an NRC decision on remand from San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, 449 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir.
2006), cert. denied, 127 S.Ct. 1124 (2007).
Related issues are raised in a case now pending before the Ninth Circuit: Public Citizen, Inc. and San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, Nos. 07-71868 and 07-72555 DOES THIS APPEAL INVOLVE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
OZ Possibility of Settlement r-Likelihood that intervening precedent will control outcome of appeal 1
Likelihood of a motion to expedite or to stay the appeal, or other procedural matters (Specify) 1Petitioner may seek a stay of fuel loading at the facility, or request an expedited decision.
f-Any other information relevant to the inclusion of this case in the Mediation Program
-" Possibility parties would stipulate to binding award by Appellate Commissioner in lieu of submission to judges
Case: 08-75058 02/04/2009 Page: 3 of 4 DktEntry: 6797034 Page 2 of 2 LOWER COURT INFORMATION JURISDICTION DISTRICT COURT DISPOSITION FEDERAL APPELLATE TYPE OF JUDGMENT/ORDER APPEALED RELIEF FEDERAL FINAL DECISION OF r-DEFAULT JUDGMENT F DAMAGES:
QUESTION DISTRICT COURT F-DISMISSAL/JURISDICTION SOUGHT Sr r-DIVERSITY INTERLOCUTORY F-DISMISSAL/MERITS AWARDED $
OTHER DECISION r-
SUMMARY
JUDGMENT r
(SPECIFY):
APPEALABLE AS OF r-JUDGMENT/COURT DECISION
" INJUNCTIONS:
RIGHT r-JUDGMENT/JURY VERDICT F
PRELIMINARY F-DECLARATORY JUDGMENT r-PERMANENT INTERLOCUTORY r
JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW F
GRANTED ORDER CERTIFIED f OTHER (SPECIFY):
F DENIED F BY DISTRICT JUDGE r
ATTORNEY FEES:
(SPECIFY):
I SOUGHT S
AWARDED S F-PENDING OTHER (SPECIFY):
F-COSTS: $F Petition for review of agency order CERTIFICATION OF COUNSEL I CERTIFY THAT:
- 1. COPIES OF ORDER/JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM ARE ATTACHED.
- 2. A CURRENT SERVICE LIST OR REPRESENTATION STATEMENT WITH TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBERS IS ATTACHED (SEE 9TH CIR. RULE 3-2).
- 3. A COPY OF THIS CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT WAS SERVED IN COMPLIANCE WITH FRAP 25.
4.I UNDERSTAND THAT FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THESE FILING REQUIREMENTS MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS, INCLUDING DISMISSAL OF THIS APPEAL.
is/Diane Curran Signature January 30, 2009 Date COUNSEL WHO COMPLETED THIS FORM NAME JDiane Curran FIRM jHarmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, L.L.P.
ADDRESSII726 M Street N.W., Suite 600 CITY jashington, D.C.
STATEF IZIP CODE 20036 E-MAIL ldcurrfI@harmIoncurrn.wom TELEPHONE j292i383SO00 FAX 1202-328-6918
- THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE FILED IN DISTRICT COURT WITH THE NOTICE OF APPEAL.
- IF FILED LATE, IT SHOULD BE FILED DIRECTLY WITH THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS.**
Case: 08-75058 02/04/2009 Page: 4 of 4 DktEntry: 6797034 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CMIECF System I hereby certify that on (date) lFebruary 4, 2009
, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system.
I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system.
Signature I/s/ Diane Curran CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When Not All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certify that on (date)
, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system.
Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the appellate CM/ECF system.
I further certify that some. of the participants in the case are not registered CM/ECF users.
I have mailed the foregoing document by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have dispatched it to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days to the following non-CM/ECF participants:
Signature