Patricia S. Bangert; David C. Williams; and Randall A.kendrick, on Behalf of Themselves and All Otherdepartment of the Interior Employeessimilarly Situated, et al. v. Manual Lujan, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, Appellant, 959 F.2d 1101 (D.C. Cir. 1992)
Annotate this CaseBefore MIKVA, Chief Judge, and RUTH BADER GINSBURG and BUCKLEY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the response thereto and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted substantially for the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum and order filed April 10, 1991 in National Federation of Federal Employees v. Lujan, No. 88cv3518 (D.D.C.). The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to justify summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C. Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980).
The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
