Center for Food Safety v. Regan, No. 19-72109 (9th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on December 21, 2022.
Download PDF
FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 5 2023 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR PUBLICATION CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY; CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, Petitioners, v. No. 19-72109 EPA No. 62719-625 Environmental Protection Agency ORDER MICHAEL REGAN, in his official capacity as Administrator; U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondents, CORTEVA AGRISCIENCE LLC, Respondent-Intervenor. POLLINATOR STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL; et al., No. 19-72280 EPA Nos. Petitioners, v. MICHAEL REGAN, in his official capacity as Administrator; U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondents, CORTEVA AGRISCIENCE LLC, 62719-625 62719-623 62719-631 Respondent-Intervenor. Before: O'SCANNLAIN, MILLER, and LEE, Circuit Judges. Judges O’Scannlain and Lee voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judge Miller voted to grant the petition for panel rehearing. Judges Miller and Lee voted, and Judge O’Scannlain recommended, to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A judge of the court requested a vote on en banc rehearing. The matter failed to receive a majority of votes of non-recused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. See Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petitions for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc, (19-72109 Dkt. No. 204; 19-72280 Dkt. No. 201), are DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be entertained. Respondents’ motions for clarification (19-72109 Dkt. No. 188; 19-72280 Dkt. No. 186) are DENIED. 2
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.
