§Why CasetextPricing

Pacific Choice Seafood Company et al v. Pritzker et al

MOTION for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Points and Authorities

78 Cited authorities

  1. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,821 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  2. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,016 times   502 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"

  3. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assoc. of the United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

    463 U.S. 29 (1983)   Cited 6,629 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that " `settled course of behavior embodies the agency's informed judgment that, by pursuing that course, it will carry out the policies [of applicable statutes or regulations]'"

  4. United States v. Mead Corp.

    533 U.S. 218 (2001)   Cited 2,592 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Customs classification ruling "has no claim to judicial deference under Chevron " but can "claim respect according to its persuasiveness"

  5. Christensen v. Harris County

    529 U.S. 576 (2000)   Cited 1,893 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that agency interpretations contained in "policy statements, agency manuals, and enforcement guidelines, all of which lack the force of law do not warrant Chevron-style deference"

  6. United States v. Bestfoods

    524 U.S. 51 (1998)   Cited 1,416 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ownership and control is insufficient to demonstrate an alter-ego relationship

  7. Thomas Jefferson Univ. v. Shalala

    512 U.S. 504 (1994)   Cited 1,276 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the agency’s interpretation must be given controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"

  8. Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic

    547 U.S. 47 (2006)   Cited 813 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing about having military recruiters on campus "suggests that law schools agree with any speech by recruiters"

  9. Astoria Federal S. L. Ass'n. v. Solimino

    501 U.S. 104 (1991)   Cited 1,252 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion

  10. Mohamad v. Palestinian Auth.

    566 U.S. 449 (2012)   Cited 490 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding term used in Torture Victim Protection Act was unambiguous despite disagreement among several circuits

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,637 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 706 - Scope of review

    5 U.S.C. § 706   Cited 20,433 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"

  13. Section 702 - Right of review

    5 U.S.C. § 702   Cited 7,049 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting judicial review of "agency action"

  14. Section 1801 - Findings, purposes and policy

    16 U.S.C. § 1801   Cited 427 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding the economies of "[m]any coastal areas . . . have been badly damaged by the overfishing of fishery resources," particularly by "[t]he activities of massive foreign fishing fleets"

  15. Section 1855 - Other requirements and authority

    16 U.S.C. § 1855   Cited 246 times
    Adopting the standards for judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 706

  16. Section 1851 - National standards for fishery conservation and management

    16 U.S.C. § 1851   Cited 198 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that FMPs “be consistent with the following national standards for fishery conservation and management”

  17. Section 1852 - Regional Fishery Management Councils

    16 U.S.C. § 1852   Cited 191 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring the councils to conduct public hearings "to allow all interested persons an opportunity to be heard in the development of fishery management plans"

  18. Section 1854 - Action by Secretary

    16 U.S.C. § 1854   Cited 175 times
    Allowing fee "to recover the actual costs directly related to the management, data collection, and enforcement of any limited access privilege program," without limiting fee to payment for observers

  19. Section 1853 - Contents of fishery management plans

    16 U.S.C. § 1853   Cited 174 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Allowing fishery management plans to "prohibit, limit, condition, or require the use of specified types and quantities of fishing gear"

  20. Section 1802 - Definitions

    16 U.S.C. § 1802   Cited 154 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Defining "conservation and management"

  21. Section 600.325 - National Standard 4-Allocations

    50 C.F.R. § 600.325   Cited 28 times
    Defining " ‘allocation’ or ‘assignment’ of fishing privileges" under National Standard 4

  22. Section 660.140 - Shorebased IFQ Program

    50 C.F.R. § 660.140   Cited 5 times

    (a)General. The regulations in this section apply to the Shorebased IFQ Program. The Shorebased IFQ Program includes a system of transferable QS for most groundfish species or species groups, IBQ for Pacific halibut, and trip limits or set-asides for the remaining groundfish species or species groups. NMFS will issue a QS permit to eligible participants and will establish a QS account for each QS permit owner to track the amount of QS or IBQ and QP or IBQ pounds owned by that owner. QS permit owners

  23. Section 660.11 - General definitions

    50 C.F.R. § 660.11   Cited 2 times
    Defining "ownership interest"

  24. Section 660.111 - Trawl fishery-definitions

    50 C.F.R. § 660.111   Cited 2 times

    (1)Shorebased IFQ Program - (i)Control limits means the maximum amount of QS or IBQ that a person may own or control, as described at § 660.140(d)(4) . (ii)Vessel limits means the maximum amount of QP a vessel can hold, acquire, and/or use during a calendar year, and specify the maximum amount of QP that may be registered to a single vessel during the year (QP Vessel Limit) and, for some species, the maximum amount of unused QP registered to a vessel account at any one time (Unused QP Vessel Limit)