Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02184/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02184-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marion C. Blakey
Respondent
Guy Heide
Petitioner
Michael A. Kosel
Petitioner
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Intervenor
Glen Orcutt
Respondent
Duane Taylor
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2184

___________

Guy Heide; Michael A. Kosel; *

Duane Taylor, *

*

Petitioners, *

*

v. *

*

Marion C. Blakey, Administrator, * Petition for Review of a

Federal Aviation Administration; * Decision of the FAA.

Glen Orcutt, Community Planner, *

Minneapolis Airports District Office, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Federal Aviation Administration; *

*

Respondents, *

*

Metropolitan Airports Commission, *

*

Intervenor on Appeal. *

___________

Submitted: October 6, 2006

Filed: October 11, 2006

___________

Before MURPHY, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46110, Guy Heide, Michael Kosel, and Duane Taylor

(petitioners) petition for review of a decision of the Administrator of the Federal

Appellate Case: 05-2184 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/11/2006 Entry ID: 2097927
-2-

Aviation Administration (FAA Administrator) determining that certain noise exposure

maps comply with applicable federal requirements. 

We conclude that the FAA Administrator’s decision is not final and thus is not

a reviewable order within the meaning of section 46110. See, e.g., Village of

Bensenville v. FAA, 457 F.3d 52, 68 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (order under § 46110 must

“possess the quintessential feature of agency decisionmaking suitable for judicial

review: finality”; to be final, agency action (1) must not be tentative or interlocutory,

but represent consummation of decisionmaking process, and (2) must determine right

or obligation or otherwise create some legal consequence); Gilmore v. Gonzales, 435

F.3d 1125, 1132-33 (9th Cir. 2006) (in defining “order” under § 46110, “finality is

key”; agency decision must impose obligation, deny right, or fix some legal

relationship; if order provides definitive statement of agency’s position, has direct and

immediate effect on day-to-day business of party asserting wrongdoing, and envisions

immediate compliance with its terms, order is sufficiently final to warrant § 46110

review), petition for cert. filed, 75 U.S.L.W. 3074 (US Aug. 4, 2006) (No. 06-211);

Aerosource, Inc. v. Slater, 142 F.3d 572, 578 (3d Cir. 1998) (to be reviewable under

§ 46110, “order” need not be formal, but must be final and must impose obligation,

deny right, or fix some legal relationship). 

Accordingly, the petition for review is dismissed. Petitioners’ motion to

supplement the record is denied as moot.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-2184 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/11/2006 Entry ID: 2097927