Cobell, Elouise v. Kempthorne, Dirk

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “under the APA, courts may only review specific agency action . . . ; courts cannot order ‘programmatic improvements,’ or ‘compel[] compliance with broad statutory mandates” (alteration in original) (quoting Cobell v. Norton, 392 F.3d 461, 472 (D.C. Cir. 2004)
• “The usual role of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo pending the outcome of litigation.”
• “The usual role of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo pending the outcome of litigation.” (cleaned up)
• “Because an on-going program or policy is not, in itself, a ‘final agency action’ under the APA, our jurisdiction does not extend to reviewing generalized complaints about agency behavior.”
• “Because an on-going program or policy is not_, in itself. a final agency action under the APA, our jurisdiction does not extend to reviewing generalized complaints about agency behavior.” (quotation marks omitted)
• “Because an on-going program or policy is not, in itself,- a ‘final agency action’ under the APA, our jurisdiction does not extend to reviewing generalized complaints about agency behavior.” (some internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).