Case law

Commissions Import Export S.A. v. Republic of the Congo

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 11, 2014

The Company appeals, and this court has jurisdiction in view of the Congo’s waiver of any claim of sovereign immunity in the commitment letters that accompanied the promissory notes. See 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(1). … does not call for the [d]istrict [c]ourt automatically to accord preclusive effect to the English Court’s determinations on the Award under the Convention, but rather to assess the English Judgment under the separate (and clearly

Ozella O. Montague v. Robert L. Kunzig

442 F.2d 1230 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 18, 1971

Ten days later Montague and the Corporation executed an agreement establishing just compensation for the taking at $475,000.00. … And the first specific mandate of the order reasonably and clearly authorized the acquisition of the usual common law vested interests in land, including the estate in fee simple.

Bachow Communications, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

237 F.3d 683 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 6, 2001

The Commission dismissed the applications as prema- ture and later established a one-day filing window. … without violating its rules, not to process pending mutually exclusive applications at all.5 Even if McElroy stood for all that appellants read into it, they could not have obtained any "equitable interest" to immunize

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. United States of America and Surface Transportation Board, United Transportation Union, Intervenors

101 F.3d 718 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 20, 1996

Co., 69 F.3d at 587-88 , this standard is clearly met in these cases. … Because the transaction would clearly be governed by section 10901 if it fell within the Commission’s jurisdiction, labor-protective provisions are purely discretionary.

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Coe

136 F.2d 771 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 29, 1943

The latter is clearly inapplicable. Paragraph (a) provides for the correction of clerical mistakes, Paragraph (b) for the relief of a party from his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. … Considered in their setting then, we think that these bankruptcy cases were not intended to destroy the well established principle that a party may not avoid the effect of a mandatory rule or statute limiting the time, by

Casey Nelson v. SEC (PUBLIC REISSUED OPINION)

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 30, 2025

It establishes a separate, threshold step at which a party must file a motion and the court must make a determination that electronic filing is appropriate. … To qualify as extraordinary, “the circumstances that caused a litigant’s delay must have been beyond its control.” Id. (quoting Menominee Indian Tribe of Wis. v. United States, 764 F.3d 51, 58 (D.C. Cir. 2014)).

Consumer Product Safety Commission v. The Anaconda Company, a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Company Consumer Product Safety Commission v. The Anaconda Company

593 F.2d 1314 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 10, 1979

"old technology" aluminum branch circuit wiring systems were installed in at least 1.5 million residences throughout the United States. 3 2 The Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC" or the "Commission"), an agency established … When the term is used in another part of the definitional section, it clearly refers to distinct articles of commerce.

Ryan Castaneira v. Kristi Noem

138 F.4th 540 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 30, 2025

Because neither the District Court nor the agency has addressed whether Chawathe or any other agency decision purports to establish a controlling standard for adjudicating Form I-130 petitions under the Adam Walsh Act, and … In 2007, the agency instructed field officers in an internal interoffice memorandum that, to “avoid denial” of an I-130 petition under the statute, the petitioner must “submit evidence of rehabilitation . . . that clearly

The Municipal Distributors Group v. Federal Power Commission, Brooks Gas Co., Inc., and Cities Service Gas Company, Intervenors

467 F.2d 741 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 27, 1972

MDG refers us to no portion of the record where their § 7(a) argument is clearly and precisely articulated without encountering similarly ambiguous or contradictory contextual material. … Section 7(e), 15 U.S.C. § 717f(e) (1970), provides as follows (emphasis added) : (e) Except in the cases governed by the provisos contained in subsection (c) of this section, a certificate shall be issued to any qualified

Interpool Ltd. v. Federal Maritime Commission

663 F.2d 142 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 18, 1980

for the carriage of cargo, to agree upon and establish tariffs, and to make rules and regulations for handling and carrying cargo.... … Many amendments are undoubtedly routine changes, clearly authorized by the underlying conference agreements, and are not likely to be opposed.

Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Transportation

15 F.3d 1112 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 11, 1994

However, we believe the DOT’s decision still qualifies as a reasonable attempt to preserve the final say on the contractual issues for the bankruptcy court. … Attempting to withdraw a § 401(h) transfer application at the last minute clearly frustrates this purpose of the Act.

United States v. McCoy, Joann

242 F.3d 399 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 16, 2001

In light of the arms-length nature of the transaction, the district court's loss calculation cannot be described as clearly erroneous. … had been the same as her testimony at the criminal trial, the jury's finding that she committed perjury at the former would establish that she did so at the latter as well.

State Of New Mexico v. Environmental Protection Agency

114 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 6, 1997

Petitioners say this is a provision of criteria not for application of § 191.14(e) but for its evisceration. 15 The criterion clearly puts a spin on this "resource" consideration. … The redacted portions of the memorandum qualify for the deliberative process privilege, National Courier Ass'n v.

New Orleans Workers' Ctr. for Racial Justice v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement

373 F. Supp. 3d 16 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 4, 2019

May 10, 2012"), the plaintiffs have not identified any evidence establishing that they were in fact created, see, e.g. , Pls.' Facts ¶ 78. … Cir. 2011) ), because, "while Exemption 6 requires a 'clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy' to qualify for withholding, Exemption 7(C) requires only that disclosure 'could reasonably be expected to constitute

Monroe Energy, LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency

750 F.3d 909 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 6, 2014

The Renewable Fuel Standards (“RFS”) program was established by Congress in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005). … To the extent PBF Holding Company alternatively contends that EPA “did not clearly identify” the factors it considered, Pet’r-Intv’nr’s Br. 29, that argument is beyond the scope of the issues raised by petitioners, see Nat

Coramae Ella Gary v. James Edward Long

59 F.3d 1391 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 28, 1995

That defense depends, of course, on the ability of the employer to establish that its employees could not reasonably have failed to know of those measures and that its grievance procedures were clearly “calculated to encourage … Considering the evidence in the light most favorable to Gary, we find that Long qualifies as an “employer” under Title VII because he served in a supervisory position.

Vasquez v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc.

302 F. Supp. 3d 36 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 9, 2018

Plaintiffs therefore insist that WFMI "qualifies under all five of the cited bases for this Court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction under the long-arm statute." Id. … "Even where there is a showing of a clearly identifiable policy, the D.C.

Melvin A. Marshall v. District of Columbia Government (Three Cases)

559 F.2d 726 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 23, 1977

Those regulations required all police officers to trim their beards and haircuts according to established standards. … Finally, we must take judicial notice of the fact that long after June, 1974, when this action was commenced, Congress amended 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (a) on October 21, 1976, by Public Law No. 94-574, 90 Stat. 2721, to qualify

Amoco Oil Company v. Environmental Protection Agency

543 F.2d 270 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 15, 1976

See Douglas, Vicarious Liability and Assumption of Risk, 38 Yale L.J. 584 , 594 (1929); Harper, The Basis of the Immunity of an Employer of an Independent Contractor, 10 Ind. … note the general disclaimer of responsibility for the actions of retailers issued by all refiners, id., and the EPA’s own comments regarding its amendments to the proposed new liability section: The amendments proposed qualified

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. The Federal Power Commission

520 F.2d 432 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 5, 1975

Three circumstances are relied on as establishing the necessary intertwining of government with private entity which results in the latter’s conduct being considered “state action.” … The FCC in its Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on this matter stated in part that: A refusal to hire Negroes or persons of any race or religion clearly raises a question of whether the licensee