Conservation Force, Inc. v. Sally Jewell

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that 3 Askan contends that “[t]his claim is still live as Askan has been harmed by the lack of publication.” Plaintiff's Supplemented Opposition to Federal Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or In the Alternative, to Stay Proceedings (“Supp. Opp.”
• stating that a case is moot where a party “has already obtained all the relief that [he or she has] sought”
• explaining that a case becomes moot when “the issues are no longer live or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome” (citation omitted)
• finding that challenge to alleged agency policy of delaying permit decisions was unfit for review based on pending Service actions that would obviate the need for future permits
• stating that a case becomes moot when among other things “the court can provide no effective remedy because a party has already ‘obtained all the relief that [it has] sought’” (quoting Monzillo v. Biller, 735 F.2d 1456, 1459 (D.C. Cir. 1984))
• “Federal courts lack jurisdiction to decide moot cases because their constitutional authority extends only to actual cases or controversies.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).