36 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 236,111 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 216,221 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
  3. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,016 times   501 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"
  4. 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]'"
  5. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc.

    531 U.S. 457 (2001)   Cited 1,090 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Chevron deference is due only to a " reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency"
  6. Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc.

    556 U.S. 208 (2009)   Cited 174 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[i]t is eminently reasonable” to conclude that statute's silence “is meant to convey nothing more than a refusal to tie the agency's hands”
  7. Occidental Engineering Co. v. I.N.S.

    753 F.2d 766 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 643 times
    Finding that plaintiff's editing role was not equivalent to a specialty occupation because he did not supervise journalists
  8. Pacific Coast Federation v. National Marine

    265 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 190 times
    Holding that an agency cannot try to "minimize" the environmental impact of an activity by simply adopting a scale of analysis so broad that it marginalizes the site-level impact of the activity on ecosystem health
  9. Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt.

    698 F.3d 1101 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 85 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that " the Biological Opinion's ‘no jeopardy’ and ‘no adverse modification’ determinations relied on protective measures set forth in a conservation plan not enforceable under the ESA; the Biological Opinion did not take into account the potential impacts of withdrawing 337.8 million gallons of groundwater from sixty-four wells along the pipeline"
  10. Florida Public Interest Research Group Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency

    386 F.3d 1070 (11th Cir. 2004)   Cited 88 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "fairly traceable" element is met where continued injury would result if the challenged conduct persisted
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,589 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 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 97,351 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
  13. 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"
  14. Section 701 - Application; definitions

    5 U.S.C. § 701   Cited 9,363 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the definition given in Section 551
  15. Section 1251 - Congressional declaration of goals and policy

    33 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 3,542 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Designating the Administrator of the EPA to "administer this chapter"
  16. Section 1311 - Effluent limitations

    33 U.S.C. § 1311   Cited 1,967 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Imposing general prohibition on "the discharge of any pollutant by any person"
  17. Section 1342 - National pollutant discharge elimination system

    33 U.S.C. § 1342   Cited 1,475 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Granting EPA the authority to require a permit for such discharges
  18. Section 1313 - Water quality standards and implementation plans

    33 U.S.C. § 1313   Cited 545 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a State to submit new or revised water regulations for EPA's review
  19. Section 7412 - Hazardous air pollutants

    42 U.S.C. § 7412   Cited 436 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Mandating the EPA "require the maximum degree of reduction" that is "achievable" in regulating hazardous air pollutants
  20. Section 7409 - National primary and secondary ambient air quality standards

    42 U.S.C. § 7409   Cited 415 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting a cost/benefit analysis by preventing the EPA from considering any factor other than health effects relating to pollutants in the air in establishing NAAQS for ozone and particulate matter
  21. Section 131.10 - Designation of uses

    40 C.F.R. § 131.10   Cited 55 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that a UAA is not required “whenever designating uses which include those specified in Section 101 of the Act”
  22. Section 131.11 - Criteria

    40 C.F.R. § 131.11   Cited 50 times
    Providing for states to establish numerical and narrative criteria
  23. Section 131.2 - Purpose

    40 C.F.R. § 131.2   Cited 37 times
    Requiring states to put in place water quality standards that designate uses, set criteria necessary to protect those uses, protect water quality through anti-degradation provisions, and "serve the purposes of the [CWA]"
  24. Section 131.14 - Water quality standards variances

    40 C.F.R. § 131.14   Cited 5 times   1 Legal Analyses

    States may adopt WQS variances, as defined in § 131.3(o) . Such a WQS variance is subject to the provisions of this section and public participation requirements at § 131.20(b) . A WQS variance is a water quality standard subject to EPA review and approval or disapproval. (a)Applicability. (1) A WQS variance may be adopted for a permittee(s) or water body/waterbody segment(s), but only applies to the permittee(s) or water body/waterbody segment(s) specified in the WQS variance. (2) Where a State