Tuaua v. United States

1 Citing brief

  1. Animal Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. Vilsack, et Al.

    Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Filed October 18, 2016

    Had the Judicial Officer treated the terms "interested parties" and "interested persons" as synonymous - which is essentially the position advanced by Animal Legal - he would have failed to give meaning to distinct terms ("interested parties" versus "interested persons") utilized by Congress. See Tuaua v. United States, 788 F.3d 300, 303 (D.C. Cir. 2015) ("[i]t is a well- established canon of statutory interpretation that the use of different words or terms within a statute demonstrates intent to convey a different meaning for those words"). Animal Legal has not identified any case authority establishing that this interpretation is erroneous and the limited authority addressing section 554(c) is not contradictory.