PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK V. USEPA, No. 14-72794 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on June 10, 2015.

Download PDF

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN RE PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK NORTH AMERICA; NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., No. 14-72794 ORDER PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK NORTH AMERICA; NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., Petitioners, v. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. Filed December 10, 2015 Before: Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, A. Wallace Tashima, and M. Margaret McKeown, Circuit Judges. 2 IN RE PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK N. AM. COUNSEL Patti A. Goldman (argued), Matthew Baca, and Kristen Boyles, Earthjustice, Seattle, Washington, for Petitioners. Sam Hirsche, Acting Assistant Attorney General, and Erica Zilioli (argued), United States Department of Justice, Environmental Enforcement Section, Washington, D.C.; Mark Dyner, Office of General Counsel, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. ORDER The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is directed to take final action by December 30, 2016 on its proposed revocation rule and its final response to Pesticide Action Network North America and Natural Resources Defense Council’s (collectively “PANNA”) 2007 petition. EPA shall file an interim status report with the Court no later than June 30, 2016. In that report, EPA shall advise the Court of its efforts to comply with the deadline. EPA shall also include a detailed explanation of extraordinary circumstances, if any exist, that make EPA’s compliance with the final action deadline of December 30, 2016 impracticable to meet. If EPA’s interim status report includes such an “extraordinary circumstances” recitation, PANNA shall have 30 days to file a response thereto. The panel shall retain jurisdiction over any further proceedings related to this petition.

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.