U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2009

Ecology Center, Inc. v. Tidwell

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided June 26, 2009 · Fletcher, Kozinski, Rawlinson

328 F. App'x 395

Counsel

Matt Kenna, Durango, CO, Thomas J. Woodbury, Esquire, Forest Defense, P.C., Missoula, MT, for Plaintiffs-Appellants., Rachel Dougan, Esquire, Elizabeth Ann Peterson, Charles Scott, Trial, Benjamin Longstreth, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Mark Steger Smith, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Defendants-Appellees.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM*

Plaintiffs lack standing because they have not identified an application of the Forest Service regulations that threatens their interests with “imminent harm.” Summers v. Earth Island Inst., — U.S. —, 129 S.Ct. 1142, 1150, 173 L.Ed.2d 1 (2009). Although projects existed at the pleading stage that potentially afforded *396standing, settlement and other dispositions of claims have removed any ongoing threat to plaintiffs’ interest. The Juel declaration appears for the first time in the reply brief, and we therefore don’t consider it. Fed. R.App. P. 10(a); Summers, 129 S.Ct. at 1150 n. *.

DISMISSED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.