Carpenters Industrial Council v. Salazar

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that a district court “lacks the authority to grant 5 The Court concludes that, because the Secretary has completed payments for all of the plaintiffs’ claims at issue in this case, see Def.’s Mot. at 4 (citing id., Ex. A (Grasso Decl.) ¶¶ 6, 8
• finding that, where later-acquired information raised “substantial and' legitimate concerns” about the agency’s findings, “[v]oluntary remand [would] preserve [the] Court’s scarce judicial resources by providing the federal defendants’ the opportunity to ‘cure their own mistakes.’ ”
• “courts retain the discretion to remand an agency decision when an agency has raised substantial and legitimate concerns in support of remand”
• “courts retain the discretion to remand an agency decision when an agency has raised substantial and legitimate concerns in support of remand”
• “[C]ourts have long recognized the propriety of voluntarily remanding a challenged agency action without judicial consideration of the merits upon an admission of agency error.”
• “[T]his Court is not persuaded that it has the authority to order vacatur of the 2008 Critical Habitat Designation without an independent determination that the [agency’s] action was not in accordance with the law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).