Laurence Gage v. United States Atomic Energy Commission and United States of America Commonwealth Edison Company, Intervenor

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the court lacked jurisdiction to review an Atomic Energy Commission order because the petitioner had “refrained from participating in the appropriate and available administrative procedure”
• \We hold that petitioners have come to the wrong forum with an inappropriate claim in search of an unavailable remedy.\
• court had no jurisdiction to hear challenges to regulations since petitioners were not parties to rulemaking proceedings
• petitioner who refrained from participating in rule-making proceeding before Atomic Energy Commission lacks standing under 28 U.S.C. § 2344(4) to challenge resulting rule
• “We hold that petitioners have come to the wrong forum with an inappropriate claim in search of an unavailable remedy.”
• “The ‘party’ status requirement operates to preclude direct appel- late court review without a record which at least resulted from the fact- finder’s focus on the alternative regulatory provisions which petitioners pro- pose.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).