Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-01-05376/USCOURTS-caDC-01-05376-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the

Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Reports. Users are requested to notify

the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made

before the bound volumes go to press.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

–————

No. 01-5376 September Term, 2002

00cv02560

Filed On: February 4, 2003

TULARE COUNTY, ET AL.,

APPELLANTS

v.

GEORGE W. BUSH, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL.,

APPELLEES

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, ET AL.,

INTERVENORS

–————

BEFORE: Ginsburg, Chief Judge, and Edwards, Sentelle,

Henderson, Randolph, Rogers, Tatel, Garland, Circuit

Judges, and Williams, Senior Circuit Judge

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the petition for rehearing en banc,

and the absence of a request by any member of the court for

a vote, it is

USCA Case #01-5376 Document #729944 Filed: 02/04/2003 Page 1 of 3
2

ORDERED that the petition be denied.*

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk

 BY:

 Deputy Clerk

* A separate statement of the panel is attached.

USCA Case #01-5376 Document #729944 Filed: 02/04/2003 Page 2 of 3
1

Statement of the Panel

PER CURIAM: Contrary to Tulare County’s argument, the

court examined the complaint against a no more rigorous

standard of pleading than that of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The

court affirmed the district court’s dismissal, for example, of

Count III of the complaint because it contained no factual

allegations that any part of the Monument lacked scientific or

historical value. The allegation that Sequoia groves comprise

only six percent of the Monument might well have been

sufficient if the President had identified only Sequoia groves

for protection, but he did not; the Proclamation covered

natural resources present throughout the Monument area. It

was therefore incumbent upon Tulare County to allege that

some part of the Monument did not, in fact, contain natural

resources that the President sought to protect. That, and

nothing more, is what led the court to conclude that the

complaint did not identify improperly designated lands ‘‘with

sufficient particularity.’’

USCA Case #01-5376 Document #729944 Filed: 02/04/2003 Page 3 of 3