F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T S H E L L O F F S H O R E , IN C . , a D el aw ar e c o rp o r a t i o n ; S HE L L GU L F OF ME XI C O, I N C . , aD e l a w a r e c orpor a t i on, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l ees, v. G R E E N P E A C E , I N C ., aC a lif o rn ia c orpor a t i on, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 12- 35332 D. C. No . 3 : 1 2 c v - 0 0 4 2 SL G OP I NI ON

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A l a s ka S ha r on L . G l e a s on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r9, 2012

S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B efo re: K O Z IN S K I, C h i ef Ju d g e, T A S H IM A an dM . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es.

O p i n i o n b yJ u d g e A . W a l l a c e Ta s h i ma

T A S H IM A , C i rc ui tJudg e: S h e ll O f f s h o r e , I n c . a n d S h e ll G u lf o f M e x ic o , I n c . ( to g e th e r , “S h e ll” ) h o ld m ul t i -y ear oi l a nd ga s l e a s e s i n the O ut e rC ont i ne nt a l S he l f ( “ O C S ” ) , l oc a t e d i n the 

# FI LED MA R 12 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

A rc t i c O ce an off the coas tof A l as ka. G re enpeace , Inc. (“ G re enpeace U S A ”) has publ i c l yunde rt a ke n ac a m pa i gn t o “ s t op S he l l ” f r om dr i l l i ng i n the A r c t i c . T he di stri ctcourtgrant ed S hel l ’ s m ot i on for aprel i m i naryi nj un ct i on , w hi ch proh i bi t ed G r e e n p e a c e U S A f

r o m c o m in g w ith in as p e c if ie dd is ta n c e o f

v e s s e ls in v o lv e din S he l l ’ s A r c t i c O C S e xpl or a t i on a nd f r om c om m i tt i ng va r i ous unl a w f ul a nd t ort i ous a c t s a ga i ns tthos e ve s s e l s . G r e e npe a c e U S A a r gue s tha tthe a c t i on i s not ju s tic iab le , th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt la c k e ds u b je c t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n to is s u e its order, and thatthe courterre d i n i t s app l i ca t i on of W i nterv. N aturalR es ou rc es D ef ense C ou nci l

, Inc. , 5 5 5 U .S . 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ) , to th e m e r its o f S h e ll’s m o tio n . W e concl ud e thatthe ac t i on pres ent s aj ust i ci abl e c as e or c on trovers y, thatthe di stri ct c o u rt h a d ju r is d ic tio n to is s u e its o r d e r , a n dth a t it d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in d o i n g s o . A c c o r d i n g l y , w e a f f i rm. I . B AC KG RO UN D A . G r e e npe a c e Ef

f o r t s t o St o p A r c t i c D r i l l i ng S hel l has pre se nt ed evi dence thatG re enpeace U S A and G re enpeace ent i t i es a r o u n d th e w o r lda r e p u b lic lyc o m m itte dto s to p p in g S h e ll’s e x p lo r a tio n o f its A r c tic O S C le a s e s . In d eed , th e w eb si t es o f v i rtu al l y al l G reen p eace o rg an i zat i o n s, i ncl ud i ng G re enpeace U S A , prom i nent l y f ea ture acam pai gn t o “ st op S hel l . ”3

B ut“ st op S hel l ” i s notm er el y acam pai gn of w ords and i m ages . G re enpeace U S A al so uses so-c al l ed “ di re ctac t i on s” t o achi eve i t s goal s, and i t s gener al co u n sel h as co n ced ed th atd i rectact i o n can i n cl u d e i l l eg al act i v i ty. T h e r e is e v id e n c e th a t G r e e n p e a c e U S A a n dits c o u n te rp a rts a r o u n dth e g lo b e a r e u n ite din th e g o a l o f

s to p p in g S h e ll. W h e n G r e e n p e a c e a c tiv is ts f o r c ib lyb o a r d e da n o il r ig of f the c oa s tof

G r e e nl a nd i n 2010 a nd us e d the i rbodi e s t o i m pe de adr i l l i ng o p e r a tio n , G r e e n p e a c e U S A ’s e x e c u tiv e d ir e c to rd e s c r ib e dth e irc o n d u c t a s “b o ld no n-vi ol entdi re ctac t i on ” by “ ou r a ct i vi st s. ” G re enpeace U S A si m i l ar l y e nd orse d th e f o r c ib le b o a r d in g o f

aS h e ll v e s s e l b yG r e e n p e a c e N e w Z e a la n da c tiv is ts in F ebruary20 12 , agai n ref erri ng t o them as “ ou r bra ve ac t i vi st s. ” T he re cord before the di stri ctcourtcont ai ned evi dence thatG re enpeace a c t i vi s t s us e d i l l e ga l “ di r e c ta c t i on” t o i nt e r f e r e w i th l e ga l oi l dr i l l i ng a c t i vi t i e s on m any s uch o cc as i on s. S ever al i nci dent s i nv ol ved S hel l vess el s thatw er e s u b s e q u e n tlyn a m e d in th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s p r e lim in a ryin ju n c tio n o r d e ra n du s e din S h e ll’s 2 0 1 2 A r c tic O C S d r illin g o p e r a tio n . See Shel l O f f shore I nc. v. G re enpeace, Inc. , 86 4 F . S up p. 2d 83 9, 85 4-55 (D . A l as ka 20 12 ). T hese i nci dent s w er e a s fo l l o w s: 1 . D i rect A cti o n A g a i n st S h el l ’s H a rvey E x p lo rer V es se lG re enpeace U S A has a dm i tt ed thati t s a ct i vi st s boarded the H arve y 1 E xplorer , b u t n o w a r g u e s –in p a s s in g –th a t th e in c id e n t is “ju r is d ic tio n a lly i rr e l e va ntt o the c urr e ntc a s e , ” pr e s um abl ybe c aus e i tt ook pl a c e i n the G ul f of M e xi c o r a the rtha n the A r c t i c O c e a n. 4 G re enpeace U S A ac t i vi st s unl aw ful l y boarded the H arve y E xplorer , a ves se l tha tS he l l c ontr a c t e d t o us e i n i t s A r c t i c O C S ope r a t i on, i n M a y2010. T he vess el w a s in th e G u lf

o f M e x ic o ( a n d s c h e d u le dto d e p a rt f o rA la s k a ) w h e n a c tiv is ts b o ard ed i t , u n fu rl ed b an n ers, an d p ai n t ed sl o g an s o n i t s w al l s. 1 2. D i r e c t A c t i on A gai n s t C ai r n E n e r gy ’ s A r c t i c D r i l l i n g O p e r at i on S hel l addu ce d evi dence thatG re enpeace used di re ctac t i on agai nstanother e n e r g yc o m p a n y , C a irn E n e r g y , in o r d e rto p r e v e n t C a irn f r o m c o n d u c tin g O C S o il a nd ga s e xpl or a t i on a c t i vi t i e s i n the A r c t i c O c e a n. G r e e npe a c e U S A ’ s e xe c ut i ve di re ct or desc ri bed the fi rs tsuch ac t i on i n G re enpeace Int ernat i on al ’ s 201 0 A nn ual R e p o rt: In A ug ust , ou r a ct i vi st s e vaded D ani sh navy com m anders and sca l ed C a i rn ’ s e x p l o r a t i o n r i g o f f Gr e e n l a n d , h a l t i n g th e o p e r a t i o n –we kne w tha t , due t o ve ryt i ghtde a dl i ne s , e ve n am i norde l a yc oul d ha ve am a j ore f f e c t ; C a i rn di dn’ tf

i nd oi l i n 2010. D k t. 5 6 - 1 9 ( E x . 1 0 1 5 a t 0 0 0 5 ) . I n 2011, G r e e npe a c e a c t i vi s t s a ga i n boa r de d aC a i rn ve s s e l of f the c oa s tof G r e e nl a nd. A ppr oxi m a t e l ytw e ntys uc h a c t i vi s t s w e r e a rr e s t e d a f t e rc l i m bi ng the ri g, att ac hi ng them se l ves und erthe ri g i n a “ survi val po d, ” and hang i ng a f ew5

m e te r s f r o m th e d r ill b it . A n e w s r e p o rt p o s te do n th e G r e e n p e a c e A f r ic aw e b s ite quot e d one of

the “ c l i m be r s ” a s s a y i ng: T h e r e ’s n o w a yC a irn c a n d r ill f o ro il w h ile w e ’r e h a n g in g n e x t to th e ird r ill- b it, a n d it’s g o in g to b e e x tr e m e lyd if f ic u lt f o rth e m to r e m ove ours urvi va l pod. T o dr i l l oi l he r e w oul d be da nge r ous i ns a ni ty . W e ha ve t o s t op the A r c t i c oi l rus h. D kt . 56 -25 (E x. 10 20 at00 01 ). 3 . D i rect A cti o n A g a i n st S h el l ’s N ob le D isc overerV es se l In F ebruary20 12 , si x G re enpeace N ew Z ea l and act i vi st s i l l egal l y boarded a nd oc c upi e d the S he l l dr i l l s hi p N ob le D isc over erw hi l e i ts t oppe d a tN e w Z e a l a nd on i t s w a yt o the A r c t i c O c e a n. A c t i vi s t s e qui ppe d w i th s urvi va l ge a rs c a l e d the 5 3 - m e te rd r illin g to w e r , s e c u r e d th e m s e lv e s to th e r ig , a n du n f u r le d“s to p S h e ll” b an n ers. T h e yw e r e a rr e s te d b yN e w Z e a la n dau th o r itie s f o u rd a y s la te r . G re enpeace U S A , i n i t s bl og , endo rs ed the ac t i vi st s’ cond uctand d es cr i bed them a s “ ourbr a ve a c t i vi s t s . ” D kt . 11- 14 a t2. It s w ebsi t e des cr i bed the i nci dentas

“ on l y the fi rs tchapt eri n w hatw i l l un do ub t edl y be an epi c batt l e. ” 4 . D i rect A cti o n A g a i n st S h el l ’s N or dic a a nd Fen n ica V e s s e ls In M ar ch 20 12 , G re enpeace ac t i vi st s boarded and o cc up i ed the N ordi c a a nd Fenni ca , tw o o f

S h e ll’s “ic e b r e a k e r ” s u p p o rt v e s s e ls , w h ile in p o rt in F in la n d . A gai n i n M ay20 12 , G re enpeace ac t i vi st s tw i ce bo ar ded and occupi ed the N ordi caIncl ud i ng w i thi n 1 00 0 m et er s of the N ob le D isc over erand the Kul lak . 2 Th e i n

j u n c t i o n b a rr e dG r e e n p e a c e f r o m: 3 a. B reak i n g i n t o o r tresp assi n g o n [sp eci fi ed ] v essel s; b . T o rtio u s lyo rille g a llyin te r f e r in g w ith th e o p e r a tio n , m o v em en to r p ro g ress o f [sp eci fi ed ] v essel s; c. B arri cad i n g , b l o ck i n g , o r p rev en t i n g access t o o r eg ress fro m [sp eci fi ed ] v essel s; d . T o rt i o u sl y o r i l l eg al l y en d an g eri n g o r th reat en i n g an y ( c o n tin u e d ...) 6 w h i l e i ttran si t ed th ro u g h S w ed i sh an dD an i sh w at ers. A ct i vi st s c hai ned them se l ves t o the vess el , drop ped w ei gh t s and other obj ec t s i n the w at ert o o bstruct th e v e s s e l’s p r o p u ls io n , a n d c r e a te dah u m a n b lo c k a d e u s in g d iv e r s . B . P r e l i m i n ar y I n j u n c t i on S h e ll w a s s c h e d u le d to b e g in f e d e r a lly - au th o r iz e de x p lo r a tio n o f its A r c tic O C S l eases i n 2 0 1 2 . In th e m o n th s l ead i n g u p t o th e ex p l o rat i o n , S h el l fi rst ob t ai ned a t em po raryre stra i ni ng order and then a prel i m i naryi nj un ct i on that b a rr e d G r e e n p e a c e U S A f r o m c o m in g w ith in s p e c if ie dd is ta n c e s o f

n a m e dS h e ll v e s s e ls in v o lv e d in th e O C S e x p lo r a tio n . See Shel l O f f shore I nc. v. G ee np eace, 2 I nc . , 20 12 W L 19 31 53 7, at*1 6 (D . A l as ka M ay29 , 20 12 ) ( am ended o rder ); Sh e ll O f f sh o re , 86 4 F . S up p. 2d at85 5 (ori gi nal order) . T he i nj un ct i on al so prevent ed G reen p eace U S A fro m co m m i tt i n g v ari o u s t o rt i o u s an di l l eg al act s ag ai n stth o se vess el s and thei r occ up ant s. B y i t s ow n t erm s, the i nj un ct i on expi re d o n O ct ob er 3( . . . c ont i nue d) 3 em pl oyee , contra ct or or vi si t or of S hel l or any of i t s a ff i l i at es w h o i s p resen to n , o r as th ey en t er o r ex i t , [sp eci fi ed ] v essel s. Sh el l O f f sh o re , 864 F . S upp. 2d a t855. 7 31 , 20 12 – the l as tday of the 20 12 A rc t i c O ce an op en w at erse as on du ri ng w hi ch S h e ll w o u lde x p lo r e its O C S le a s e s . G r e e npe a c e U S A c ha l l e nge s the i nj unc t i on on s e ve r a l gr ounds : ( 1) tha tthe di sput e does notpres enta j ust i ci abl e c as e or c on trovers y; (2) thatthe di stri ctcourt l ac ked subj ec tm att erj uri sdi ct i on ; (3) thatS hel l has s ued the w rong G re enpeace ent i ty; and (4) thatthe di stri ctcourtbase d i t s rul i ng on l egal st andards and fac tual f i ndi ngs tha tw e r e e rr one ous . W e c onc l ude tha te a c h of the s e c ont e nt i ons l a c ks m e r it. I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW O urs t a nda r d of

r e vi e w f orpr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on appe a l s i s bynow fam i l i ar : W e r evi ew the di stri ctcourt ’ s dec i si on t o g rantor deny a prel i m i nary i nj unc t i on f

orabus e of

di s c r e t i on. O urr e vi e w i s l i m i t e d a nd defe re nt i al . T he di stri ctcourt ’ s i nt erpret at i on of the un derl yi ng l egal pri nci pl es , ho w ever , i s s ubj ec tt o d e nov o revi ew and a di stri ctcourt ab u s e s its d is c r e tio n w h e n it m a k e s a n e rr o ro f la w . Sw . V oterR egistrat i on E du c. P roj ec t v. Sh el ley , 344 F . 3d 914, 918 ( 9th C i r . 2003) ( e n b a n c ) ( in te rn a l c ita tio n s o m itte d ) ; s e e al s o U ni te d State s v . Hi nk

s on , 585 F . 3d8

1247, 1251 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( e n ba nc ) ( a rt i c ul a t i ng ourtw o- pa rtt e s tf orabus e of di sc re t i on ). W e r e v ie w f in d in g s o f

f a c t f o rc le a re rr o r . T

halhe i m e rv . C i t

yof San D i ego , 64 5 F . 3d 11 09 , 11 15 (9th C i r. 20 11 ). “ U nde rthi s s t a nda r d, [ a ] s l ong a s the d is tr ic t c o u rt g o t th e la w r ig h t, it w ill n o t b e r e v e r s e ds im p lyb e c au s e th e ap p e lla te c ourtw oul d ha ve a rr i ve d a tadi f f e r e ntr e s ul ti f

i tha d appl i e d the l a w t o the f a c t s of the ca se . ” I

d. (a l t er at i on i n o ri gi nal ) ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). W e r e v ie w s ta n d in g , r ip e n e s s , a n dm o o tn e s s d e n o v o . See D oe N o. 1 v. R ee d , 6 9 7 F .3 d 1 2 3 5 , 1 2 3 8 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 2 ) ; Storm an s, Inc. v. Selec ky , 586 F . 3d 11 09 , 11 19 (9th C i r. 20 09 ). “ [W ] e have an i nd ependentob l i gat i on t o con si der m o o tn ess s u a s

p o n te . ” N

A S D D is p u te R e s o lu tio n , I

n c . v . J u d ic ia l C o u n c il , 488 F . 3d 10 65 , 10 68 (9th C i r. 20 07 ) ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). I I I . J U STI C I A BI LI TY A . S ta n d i n g a n d R i p en ess G r e e npe a c e U S A ’ s j us t i c i abi l i tya r gum e nt s a r e ha z y , butappe a rt o c ha l l e nge bo th S hel l ’ s s t andi ng t o sue and the ri peness of the di sput e. “ A rt i c l e I I I s t a ndi ng r e qui r e s a n i nj urytha ti s a c tua l ori m m i ne nt , notc onj e c tur a l orhypothe t i c a l . I n the c o n te x t o f

in ju n c tiv e r e lie f

, th e p la in tif

f m u s t d e m o n s tr a te ar e a l o rim m e d ia te threa tof i rr epar abl e i nj ury. ” C o le v . O r o v ille U n io n Hig h Sc h . D is t. , 228 F . 3d 1092, 1100 ( 9th C i r . 2000) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rks om i tt e d) . T he s a m e f a c t s by9

w hi ch S hel l has s ho w n (1) a l i kel i ho od of succ es s on the m er i t s of i t s c l ai m that G r e e n p e a c e U S A w o u ldc o m m it to rtio u s o rille g a l a c ts a g a in s t S h e ll’s A r c tic dri l l i ng op er at i on i n the abse nce of an i nj un ct i on , and (2) thatthe re sul t i ng harm w ou l d b e i rr epar abl e, nece ss ar i l y e st abl i sh thatS hel l has s t andi ng t o see k in ju n c tiv e r e lie f

. See i n f ra , P a rt s V . B . 1- 2. T he di s put e i s a l s o r i pe be c aus e the f a c t s a r e s uf

f i c i e nt l yde ve l ope d a nd the n a tu r e o f th e d is p u te w a rr a n ts p r o m p t a d ju d ic a tio n . See A bb ot t

L ab s. v. G ardn er , 387 U . S . 136, 149 ( 1967) ( e xpl a i ni ng tha tthe r i pe ne s s i nqui ryc ons i de r s “ the f i tne s s of the i s s ue s f

orj udi c i a l de c i s i on a nd the ha r ds hi p t o the pa rt i e s of w ith h o ld in g c o u rt c o n s id e r a tio n ” ) . S h e ll p r e s e n te du n d is p u te de v id e n c e th a t it is onl yauthor i z e d t o e xpl or e the s e l e a s e s dur i ng the na rr ow ope n w a t e rs e a s on of J u lyth r o u g h O c to b e r , a n d th e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o n c lu d e dth a t it f a c e dirr e p a r ab le ha rm abs e nti nj unc t i ve r e l i e f ; t o w i thhol d de c i s i on i n s uc h ac ont e xtw oul d w ork a s e r io u s h a r d s h ip u p o n S h e ll. B . M o o tn ess I ti s undi s put e d tha tthe pr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on e xpi r e d byi t s ow n t e rm s on O ct ob er31 , 20 12 – aft eroral ar gu m ent , bu tbefore thi s C ou rtcoul d render aO n N ove m be r1, 2012, S he l l f i l e d am ot i on t o di s m i s s the appe a l f or 4 m o o tn e s s , o n th e g r o u n d s th a tth e p r e l i m i n a ryi n j u n c t i o n h a de x p i r e db yi t s o wn t erm s. G reen p eace arg u ed i n resp o n se th atth e case fellw i th i n a m o o tn ess ex ce p ti o n . O u r ru li n g to d ay th at th e c as e is n o t m o o t o p er ates as a d en ial o f S h ell’ s m o t i o n t o d i sm i ss. 10 d e c is io n . S o w e m u s t d e te rm in e w h e th e rth e a c tio n is m o o t. W e c o n c lu d e th a t it 4 f a l l s w i thi n the m ootne s s e xc e pt i on f ordi s put e s “ c apabl e of

r e pe t i t i on, y e te va di ng re vi ew . ” N

A A C P, W . R egi on v . C i t

yof R i c hm ond , 74 3 F . 2d 13 46 , 13 53 (9th C i r. 1 9 8 4 ) ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ) . I n or de rf

orthe e xc e pt i on t o appl y , “ ( 1) the dur a t i on of the c ha l l e nge d a c t i on o rin ju rym u s t b e to o s h o rt to b e f u llylitig a te d ; a n d( 2 ) th e r e m u s t b e ar e a s o n ab le l i kel i ho od thatthe sam e party w i l l be subj ec tt o the ac t i on agai n. ” I d. As we r e c e nt l ye xpl a i ne d, “ [ c ] a s e s tha tqua l i f yunde rpr ong one pr e s e ntc ontr ove r s i e s of i nh er ent l y l i m i t ed du ra t i on . ” D o e N o . 1 , 6 9 7 F .3 da t 1 2 4 0 . A n a c tio n is “f u lly litig a te d ” if

it is r e v ie w e d b yth is C o u rt a n dth e S u p r e m e C o u rt. See A lcoa, Inc. v. B onne v i l le P ow e rA dm i n. , 69 8 F . 3d 77 4, 78 6-87 (9th C i r. 20 12 ). A pr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on l i m i t e d t o as i ngl e A r c t i c O c e a n ope n w a t e rs e a s on, tha tba r s G r e e npe a c e U S A f r om phy s i c a l l yi nt e r f

e r i ng w i th S he l l ’ s A r c t i c dr i l l i ng ope r a t i on, w i l l ne ve rl a s tl ong e nough t o a l l ow f ul l l i t i ga t i on be c aus e of the i nhe r e nt l yl i m i t e d dur a t i on of the ope n w a t e rs e a s on a nd, c orr e s pondi ngl y , the d r illin g s e a s o n . U n d e rits m u lti- y e a rle a s e , S h e ll is le g a llyau th o r iz e dto d r ill o n lyT he prel i m i naryi nj un ct i on ran from M ar ch 28 , 20 12 , throu gh O ct ob er 5 3 1 , 2 0 1 2 . See Sh el l

O f f sh o re , 864 F . S upp. 2d a t855. T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d not e x p la in w h yit s o te m p o r a llylim ite dth e in ju n c tio n . I t ap p e a r s , h o w e v e r , f r o m its m ovi ng pape r s , tha tS he l l s oughtapr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on onl ythr ough the 2012 e xpl or a t i on dr i l l i ng s e a s on. 11 betw ee n Jul y 10 and O ct ob er31 of ea ch ye ar . T he no w -e xp i re d p re l i m i nary i nj un ct i on agai nstG re enpeace U S A w as by i t s ow n t erm s l i m i t ed t o a t ot al d u r a t i o n o f

l e s s th a n s e v e n mo n th s , e n c o mp a s s i n g th e d r i l l i n g s e a s o n , p l u s th e t i me nece ss ary f

or S hel l vess el s t o transi tt o the A rc t i c O ce an. O rder s of s uch 5 i n h e r e n t l yl i m i t e d d u r a t i o n wi l l a l m o s ta l way s e v a d e f u l l r e v i e w. Se e, e . g. , U ni ted State s v . O r egon , 65 7 F . 2d 10 09 , 10 12 (9th C i r. 19 85 ) ( ho l di ng thatA m er i can Indi an tri be’ s app ea l fr om an i nj un ct i ve order banning sal m on fi shi ng i n 1 98 0 w as no tm oo teven tho ug h the spri ng sa l m on run o f 198 0 w as ov erand the order w as l i m i t ed t o thatrun). T urni ng t o the s e c ond pr ong, w e ha ve e ve ryr e a s on t o be l i e ve tha tthe unde r l y i ng w r ong w i l l r e c ur . S he l l ha s dr i l l i ng r i ght s unde ram ul t i - y e a rl e a s e , a nd there i s no rea son t o b el i eve thatG re enpeace U S A ’ s “ st op S hel l ” c am pai gn w as l i mi t e d t o th e 2 0 1 2 d r i l l i n g s e a s o n . W e c o n c l u d e th a tth e r e i s a tmi n i mu m a

“ r e a s onabl e e xpe c t a t i on tha tthe s a m e c om pl a i ni ng pa rty[ w i l l ] be s ubj e c tt o the sam e a ct i on agai n. ” W

ei n stei n v. B ra d

f o rd , 4 2 3 U .S . 1 4 7 , 1 4 9 ( 1 9 7 5 ) . I V . J URI S DI CT I ON12

T he prel i m i naryi nj un ct i on ati ss ue prot ec t s s peci fi c S hel l vess el s a s they j ou rneyfr om shore- base d fac i l i t i es i n the U ni t ed S t at es , throu gh U ni t ed S t at es t e rr i t or i a l w a t e r s , a nd i nt o the w a t e r s of the U . S . E xc l us i ve E c onom i c Z one ( “E E Z ” ) w h e r e r ig s a tta c h to th e A r c tic s e ab e da n dc o n d u c t e x p lo r a tio n a c tiv itie s . G r e e n p e a c e U S A d o e s n o t c h a lle n g e th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s c o n c lu s io n th a t, w ith re gard t o i nj un ct i ve re l i ef i n the U ni t ed S t at es and i t s t erri t ori al w at er s, the court h a d s u b je c t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n b a s e do n d iv e r s e p a rtyc itiz e n s h ip . See 2 8 U . S. C. § 1 33 2(a) . L i kew i se , G re enpeace U S A do es no tdi sput e thatthe O ut erC on t i nent al S hel f L ands A ct(“ O C S L A ”) gave the courtj uri sdi ct i on t o g ranti nj un ct i ve re l i ef w h ile S h e ll’s v e s s e ls a r e a tta c h e d to th e s e ab e d . See 43 U . S . C . § 1333( a ) ( 1) ( e xt e ndi ng j ur i s di c t i on t o the “ s e abe d of the out e rC ont i ne nt a l S he l f a nd t o . . . de vi c e s pe rm a ne nt l yort e m por a r i l ya tt a c he d t o the s e abe d, w hi c h m a ybe e r e c t e d the r e on f

orthe purpos e of

e xpl or i ng f

or , de ve l opi ng, orpr oduc i ng r e s o u r c e s th e r e f

r o m ” ) . G re enpeace U S A i s now sol el y app ea l i ng the di stri ctcourt ’ s hol di ng that u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 3 3 , it h a d a d m ir a ltyju r is d ic tio n to e n jo in c o n d u c t r e la tin g to ve s s e l s tha tw e r e ne i the ri n U . S . t e rr i t or i a l w a t e r s ( w he r e di ve r s i tyj ur i s di c t i on ex t en d s) n o r att ach ed t o th e seab ed (w h ere O C S L A j u ri sd i ct i o n ex t en d s) –th ati s,See Sh el l O f f sh o re , 2 0 1 2 W L 1 9 3 1 5 3 7 , a t * 2 . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id 6 n o t r e a c h th e q u e s tio n o f w h e th e rits d iv e r s ityju r is d ic tio n e x te n d e dto th e E E Z . I d. a t*5 n. 42. 13 ve s s e l s tr a ns i t i ng thr ough the U . S . E E Z . W e ne e d notde c i de w he the r§ 1333 6 prov i des j uri sdi ct i on ov erthi s part i cul arstre t ch of an oi l ri g’ s j ou rneybecause a c o u rt c a n e x e r c is e s u p p le m e n ta l ju r is d ic tio n o v e rth e e n tir e c o n s titu tio n a l c a s e . See 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 6 7 (a ). T h e c o m m o n n u cleu s o f o p er ativ e f ac ts u n d er lyin g S h ell’ s c l a i m f ori nj unc t i ve r e l i e f

do notc ha nge w he n i t s ve s s e l s tr a ve r s e a n i nvi s i bl e l i ne s e pa r a t i ng U . S . t e rr i t or i a l w a t e r s f r om the w a t e r s of

the U . S . E E Z , nora tthe m om e ntw he n i t s r i gs de t a c h f r om the s e abe d; thi s i s the r e f or e as i ngl e “ c a s e or controvers y” for the pu rposes of § 1 36 7(a) , and w e c on cl ud e thatthe di stri ctcourt d idn o t e rrin e x e r c is in g ju r is d ic tio n o v e rit. V . DI S CUS S I ON A . W h e t h e r G r e e n p e a c e U S A is t h e P r o p e r E n t it y t o E n j o in A c om m on thr e a d i n G r e e npe a c e U S A ’ s va r i ous c ha l l e nge s i s the a r gum e nt th a t G r e e n p e a c e U S A w a s n o t d ir e c tlyin v o lv e din a n yp r io ra tta c k s o n S h e ll ve s s e l s . B ut S h e ll d o e s n o t n e e d to s h o w p a s t in ju ryb yG r e e n p e a c e U S A to e s tab lis h s ta n d in g o rto s u c c e e d o n th e m e r its o f its p r e lim in aryin

ju n c tio n m o tio n . See D i a m o n t i n ey v. B o rg , 91 8 F . 2d 79 3, 79 5 (9th C i r. 19 90 ) ( “ [A ] s c om m ent at ors have no t ed, ‘ the i nj ury nee d n othave been i nfl i ct ed w hen app l i ca t i on [f or an14

i nj un ct i on ] i s m ade or be ce rt ai n t o o cc ur; a s trong threa tof i rr epar abl e i nj ury b e f o r e tr ia l is a n a d e q u a te b a s is .’ R e q u ir in g as h o w in g o f a c tu a l in ju ryw o u ld de f e a tthe purpos e of

the pr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on, w hi c h i s t o pr e ve nta n i nj uryf r om o c c u rr in g .” ( q u o tin g 1 1 C h a r le s A la n W r ig h t e t a l., Fe de r al P r ac t i c e and P ro cedu re § 2 9 4 8 a t 4 3 7 - 3 8 ( 1 9 7 3 ) ) ; see a l so R esta tem en t

(Seco n d ) o f T o rt s § 933 c m t . ( 1) ( b) ( “ [ A ] c om m on m e thod of pr ovi ng athr e a tof

af utur e t orti s bypr ovi ng ap a s t to rt u n d e rc o n d itio n s th a t r e n d e rits r e p e titio n o rc o n tin u a n c e p r o b ab le . I t is no tnece ss ary, ho w ever , t o p rove pastw rong . ”) . R e g a r d le s s , G r e e np e a c e U S A d o e s n o t d is p u te e v id e n c e th a t its o w n a c tiv is ts carri ed o u tth e att acko n S h el l ’ s H arve y E xplorer . A nd , al tho ug h the re cord do es n o t m a k e c le a rw h ic h G r e e n p e a c e e n tityw a s d ir e c tlyr e s p o n s ib le f o rm u ltip le a tt a c ks on C a i rn E ne r gyve s s e l s i n the A r c t i c O c e a n, G r e e npe a c e U S A ’ s e xe c ut i ve d i rect o r essen t i al l y t o o kcred i tfo r i t , d escri b i n g th e p erp etrat o rs as “ o u r act i v i st s” and b oast i ng thatas a r es ul tof thi s di re ctac t i on , “ C ai rn di dn ’ tfi nd oi l i n 2 01 0. ” D kt . 56 -19 (E xh . 10 15 at00 05 ). A cc ordi ng l y, the di stri ctcourtob se rved that al tho ug h S hel l had “ no tdem on stra t ed thatG re enpeace U S A w as di re ct l y i nv ol ved i n ei ther the N ew Z ea l and o r F i nn i sh i nci dent s” i nv ol vi ng the N ob le D isc over er , N ordi ca , a nd Fenni ca , o th e re v id e n c e s h o w e dth a t “s to p p in g S h e ll a n do th e ro il c o m p a n ie s f

r o m d r illin g in th e A r c tic is m o r e lik e lyth a n n o t o n e o f th e o v e r a llT h e d is s e n t a r g u e s th a t G r e e n p e a c e U S A ’s le g a l s ta tu s is r e le v a n t to 7 th is ap p e a l b e c au s e “ap e r s o n ( o rc o rp o r a tio n ) c a n b e h e ldle g a llyr e s p o n s ib le o n ly f o rh is o w n a c tio n s , ab s e n t e x tr a o r d in a ryc ir c u m s ta n c e s .” D is s e n t a t 3 . B u t th is tru is m , w h ic h th e d is s e n t d e r iv e s f r o m c a s e s in v o lv in g d e c is io n s o n th e m e r its , se e Fi rs t N at ’ l C i t yB ank v . B anc o P ar a E l

C om e r c i o E

x te r i orde C uba (B an ce c ) , 462 U .S . 6 1 1 , 6 1 8 ( 1 9 8 3 ) ( ap p e a l f r o m d is m is s a l o f

c o m p la in t o n th e m e r its ) ; NAACP v . C lai borne H

ardw ar e C o. , 458 U . S . 886, 896 ( 1982) ( appe a l f r om j udgm e nt i m po si ng dam ages l i abi l i ty) , has no app l i ca t i on t o the pres entcont extof an appeal fr om a pre l i m i naryi nj un ct i ve order. T o d et erm i ne w hether S hel l has dem on stra t ed a l i kel i ho od of succ es s on the m er i t s, w e m ustengage i n a prob abi l i st i c i nq ui ry , an i nqui rytha ts i m pl yw a s nota ddr e s s e d i n C lai bo rne H ardw are a nd B an ce c . T h e q u e s tio n ab le n a tu r e o f th e d is s e n t’s r e lia n c e o n m e r its - b a s e dd e c is io n s is f urthe rhe i ght e ne d bythe l i m i t a t i ons i nhe r e nti n i nt e r l oc ut oryr e vi e w . U nl i ke r e v ie w o f

ad e c is io n o n th e m e r its , o u rp r e lim in a ryin ju n c tio n d e c is io n s a r e b o th n a rr o w in s c o p e a n d r e n d e r e d w ith o u t b e n e f it o f af u llyd e v e lo p e df

a c tu a l r e c o r d . Se e C tr . f

orB i ologi c al

D i v e rs i t yv . Salaz ar , — F . 3d — , 2013 W L 440727, a t*4 ( 9 th Ci r . Fe b . 4 , 2 0 1 3 ) . Th e s e l i mi t a t i o n s e x p l a i n w h y , a s w e h a v e o b s e rv e dt i me and agai n, prel i m i naryi nj un ct i on s dec i si on s are j ustthat– “ prel i m i nary . ” I d. at * 3 ; R anc he rs Cat t le m e n A c t i on L egal Fund U ni te d Stoc k

gr ow e rs of

A m . v . U

. S. D ep’t of A gri c. , 499 F . 3d 1108, 1114 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ( quot i ng S. O r. B arterFai r v . Jack son Cnt y. , 372 F . 3d 1128, 1136 ( 9th C i r . 2004) ) . I n l i ghtof the i m port a nt di st i nct i on s betw ee n revi ew of a pre l i m i naryi nj un ct i on vers us a m er i t s- base d r e v i e w, we f

a i l t o s e e h o w C la i b o rn e H a rdw a re a nd B an ce c can b e i nstruct i ve. 15 pri ori ty s tra t egi es of G re enpeace w orl dw i de, as w el l as of G re enpeace U S A . ” Sh el l O f f sh o re , 86 4 F . S up p. 2d at84 8. W e s ee no cl earl y e rr on eous fa ctual f i ndi ngs unde r gi r di ng tha tc onc l us i on. 7 B . G r an t of

P r e l i m i n ar y I n j u n c t i on A p l a i n t i f

f wh o s e e k s ap r e l i m i n a ryi n j u n c t i o n m u s ts h o w: [ 1 ] th a t h e is lik e lyto s u c c e e do n th e m e r its , [ 2 ] th a t h e is lik e lyto suff eri rr epar abl e harm i n the abse nce of prel i m i naryre l i ef , [3] that16

th e b a la n c e o f

e q u itie s tip s in h is f

a v o r , a n d[ 4 ] th a t a n in

ju n c tio n is in th e p u b lic in te r e s t. W i nter , 5 5 5 U .S . a t 2 0 . T he di s tr i c tc ourtappl i e d the c orr e c tl e ga l s t a nda r d a nd a s ourdi s c us s i on bel ow m akes cl ear, i tdi d so i n a m anner thatw as l og i ca l , pl ausi bl e, and sup po rt ed b yth e r e c o r d . Se e Hi nk s on , 585 F . 3d a t1251. A s s uc h, w e c onc l ude tha tthe d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in g r a n tin g th e p r e lim in a ryin ju n c tio n . 1. L i k el i h oo d of S u cc es s on th e M er i ts G r e e n p e a c e U S A c h a lle n g e s th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s c o n c lu s io n th a t S h e ll

“ dem on stra t ed by a prepond er ance of the evi dence thati ti s l i kel y thatG re enpeace U S A w oul d i nt e nd t o c om m i tt ort i ous ori l l e ga l a c t s a ga i ns tS he l l ’ s A r c t i c dr i l l i ng op er at i on s i n the abse nce of prel i m i naryi nj un ct i ve re l i ef . ” Sh el l O f f sh o re , 8 6 4 F. S upp. 2d a t850. F i r s t , G r e e npe a c e U S A a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d by im p e rm is s ib lys h if

tin g th e b u r d e n o f

p r o o f to it. T h e c o u rt e x p la in e dth a t it “a c c o r d e d am in o rd e g r e e o f w e ig h t to th e f

a c t th a t th e r e is n o s w o rn s ta te m e n t in thi s r e c or d f

r om G r e e npe a c e U S A i ndi c a t i ng tha tthe or ga ni z a t i on w i l l nota tt e m pt to rtio u s o ru n la w f

u l a c ts th is s u m m e ra g a in s t S h e ll” a n dth a t, to th e c o n tr a ry , its e x e c u tiv e d ir e c to rs ta te d p u b lic lyin M a r c h 2 0 1 2 th a t “‘[ w ]h a te v e rh ap p e n s in c ourt , G r e e npe a c e w i l l c ont i nue t o oppos e S he l l ’ s pl a ns pe a c e f ul l ya nd17

vi go rousl y. ’ ” I

d. at 8 4 9 . T h e d istrict co u rt’s “w eig h in g ” o f G re en p ea ce U S A ’s s i l e nc e am ount s t o a n obs e rva t i on tha tc ontr a rye vi de nc e of f e r e d byS he l l s t ood un re fut ed. T here i s c on se qu ent l y no err or here. S e c ond, G r e e npe a c e U S A a r gue s tha tS he l l f a i l e d t o m e e ti t s bur de n. T he r e c o r d b e f

o r e th e d i s tr i c tc o u rtc o n t a i n e de v i d e n c e th a t : ( 1 ) G r e e n p e a c e U SA forc i bl y boarded and d ef ac ed a S hel l vess el , the H arve y E xplorer , a s p a rt o f

its c a m p a ig n to “s to p S h e ll” f r o m d r illin g in th e A r c tic ; ( 2 ) o n tw o o c c a s io n s , a c tiv is ts tha tG r e e npe a c e U S A t e rm e d “ oura c t i vi s t s ” e m pl oy e d unl a w f ul a nd t ort i ous m eans t o st op another e nergy c om pany (C ai rn) f rom fi nd i ng oi l i n the A rc t i c; ( 3) G r e e npe a c e U S A c onc e de d tha ti tus e s “ di r e c ta c t i on” – i nc l udi ng unl a w f ul cond uct– as m eans t o an end ; (4) G re enpeace U S A and the gl ob al G re enpeace or ga ni z a t i on s har e the goa l of s t oppi ng S he l l f

r om dr i l l i ng i n the A r c t i c ; a nd ( 5) G re enpeace ac t i vi st s f

rom other nat i on s have on m ul t i pl e occ as i on s e m pl oyed u n l aw fu l o r t o rt i o u s m ean s t o st o p S h el l fro m d ri l l i n g i n th e A rct i c. O n th ese facts, w e c a n n o t s a yth a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt ab u s e dits d is c r e tio n in c o n c lu d in g th a t S h e ll m e ti t s bur de n. Se e Hi nk s on , 585 F . 3d a t1251. 2. L i k el i h oo d of Ir re p arab l e H arm T he di s tr i c tc ourtc onc l ude d tha tS he l l de m ons tr a t e d al i ke l i hood of irr e p a r ab le h a rm ab s e n t in ju n c tiv e r e lie f

b e c au s e “ille g a l o rto rtio u s e f f o rts toW e have s earc hed the bri ef s i n v ai n for cl ues a s t o w hi ch 19 97 m att er s 8 G reen p eace U S A refers. 18 b o a r d o rin te r f

e r e w ith [ its ] v e s s e ls w o u ldb e lik e lyto p r e s e n t u n a c c e p tab le r is k s to hu m an l i fe , prop erty and the envi ronm ent . ” Sh el l O f f sh o re , 864 F . S upp. 2d a t851 (i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). In supp ortof these fi nd i ng s, the court c o n s id e r e d e v id e n c e th a t a c tio n s o f th e s o rt u n d e rta k e n b yG r e e n p e a c e a c tiv is ts a ga i ns tS he l l ve s s e l s i n N e w Z e a l a nd, F i nl a nd, a nd G r e e nl a nd pos e r i s ks t o the s a f e tyof a c t i vi s t s a nd ve s s e l oc c upa nt s a l i ke . T he c ourta l s o f ound – a nd G r e e n p e a c e U S A d o e s n o t d is p u te –th a t “if G r e e n p e a c e U S A s u c c e s s f u lly di s rupt e d S he l l ’ s ope r a t i on, c a l c ul a t i ng the a m ountof e c onom i c ha rm w oul d be verydi ff i cul t . ” I d. G reen p eace U S A o ffers n o th i n g b eyo n dco n cl u so ry st at em en t s an dcase sum m ar i es i n sup po rtof i t s one-s ent ence ar gu m entthatthe “ l i kel i ho od of future i nj ury i s s pecul at i ve and canno tbe base d o n m att er s thatoccurre d i n 1 99 7, or that 8 in v o lv e d e n titie s th a t a r e n o t G r e e n p e a c e U S A .” T h e r e c o r dp r o v id e s a m p le s upportf orthe c onc l us i on tha tG r e e npe a c e U S A ha s e i the runde rt a ke n di r e c t l y , or e m br a c e d a s i t s ow n, t a c t i c s tha ti nc l ude f or c i bl e boa r di ng of

ve s s e l s a ts e aa nd the us e of hum a n be i ngs a s i m pe di m e nt s t o dr i l l i ng ope r a t i ons . W e f i nd i tt oo pl a i n f

or debat e thatsuch t ac t i cs atm i ni m um po se a s er i ou s r i sk of harm t o h um an l i fe ,19

part i cul ar l y i f a tt em pt ed i n the extre m e c on di t i on s of the A rc t i c O ce an, and that su ch h arm co u l d fi n d n o ad eq u at e rem ed y atl aw . A cco rd i n g l y, w e fi n dn o ab u se of di s c r e t i on i n the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s c onc l us i on. Se e Hi nk s on , 585 F . 3d a t1251. 3. B al an ce of E q u i ti es T he di stri ctcourtconcl ud ed that“ [b] y c ar ef ul l y t ai l ori ng prel i m i nary i nj unc t i ve r e l i e f

t o f oc us on i l l e ga l a nd t ort i ous c onduc t , a nd m i ni m i z i ng a ny i m p acto n G reen p eace U S A ’ s ri g h tt o m o n i t o r th e act i v i t i es an dp eacefu l l y p ro t est a ga i ns tS he l l w i thi n the c onf i ne s of the l a w , . . . the ba l a nc e of the e qui t i e s r e m a i ns sol i dl y t i pp ed i n S hel l ’ s f avor. ” Sh el l

O f f sh o re , 8 6 4 F . S u p p . 2 da t 8 5 3 . G re enpeace U S A ar gu es thatthe courterre d b y f ai l i ng t o app l y ast andard that w o u ldr e q u ir e th e b a la n c e o f h a r d s h ip s to tip “s h a rp ly ” in S h e ll’s f a v o r . U nd er W i nter , a pre l i m i naryi nj un ct i on m ov antm ustshow , i nt eral i a, that

“ the bal ance of equi t i es t i ps i n h i s f avor. ” 555 U . S . at20 . B uti f apl ai nt i ff can onl ys how tha tthe r e a r e “ s e r i ous que s t i ons goi ng t o the m e r i t s ” – al e s s e rs how i ng th a n lik e lih o o d o f

s u c c e s s o n th e m e r its –th e n ap r e lim in a ryin ju n c tio n m a ys till i ssu e i f th e “ b al an ce o f h ard sh i p s t i p s sharpl y i n the pl ai nt i ff’ s f

avor, ” and the other tw o W i nterf a c to r s a r e s a tis f

ie d . A l l i an ce f

or the W i ld R ocki es , 632 F . 3d a t1135 (em p h asi s ad d ed ). B u tth e seri o u s q u est i o n s ap p ro ach i s i n ap p l i cab l e i n th i s case20

b e c au s e , a s e x p la in e d ab o v e , S h e ll d e m o n s tr a te d , a n dth e d is tr ic t c o u rt f o u n d , a l i k el i h o o d o f su ccess o n th e m eri t s. W e c onc l ude tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtdi d note rri n f i ndi ng tha tthe ba l a nc e of equi t i es favo rs S hel l . S hel l has an i nt er es ti n con du ct i ng l egal l y autho ri ze d expl orat i on of i t s A rc t i c l ea se s w i tho utdang er ou s i nt er fe re nce f rom G re enpeace U S A . G reen p eace U S A h as a co u n t erv ai l i n g F i rstA m en d m en tri g h tt o p ro t est S h e ll’s d r illin g a c tiv itie s , a n d th e in ju n c tio n im p o s e s s a f

e tyz o n e s a r o u n dS h e ll v e s s e ls th a t p r e v e n t G r e e n p e a c e U S A f r o m e x e r c is in g its r ig h ts in c lo s e p r o x im ity t o thos e ve s s e l s . G r e e npe a c e U S A a r gue s tha tthi s i s a n undue s pe e c h r e s tr i c t i on, proh i bi t ed un der Sc h e n c k v . Pr o - Ch o i c e Ne two rk o f W . N. Y. , 5 1 9 U .S . 3 5 7 ( 1 9 9 7 ) . W e d is a g r e e . T h e s a f e tyz o n e s d o n o t p r e v e n t G r e e n p e a c e U S A f r o m c o m m u n ic a tin g w ith i t s t ar ge taudi e nc e be c aus e , a s the di s tr i c tc ourtobs e rve d, G r e e npe a c e U S A ha s no audi e nc e a ts e a . A nd a l though the i nj unc t i on i m pos e s as a f e ty“ bubbl e ” a r ound S he l l ’ s ve s s e l s , G r e e npe a c e U S A ’ s r e l i a nc e on Schenck a nd i t s di s c us s i on of bu bb l e z on es ar ou nd abort i on cl i ni cs i s s orel y m i spl ac ed. S peec h i s, of course , m os tpr ot e c t e d i n s uc h qui nt e s s e nt i a l publ i c f or aa s the publ i c s i de w a l ks s u rr o u n d in g ab o rtio n c lin ic s . Se e id . a t 3 7 7 . B u t th e h ig h s e a s a r e n o t ap u b lic forum , and the l es sons of Schenck have l i tt l e app l i cabi l i ty there .21

W e c o n c lu d e th a t, in lig h t o f th e s e r io u s r is kto h u m a n lif e a n dp r o p e rty pos e d bythe c onduc ttha tthe pr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on e nj oi ns , a nd gi ve n the na rr ow t ai l ori ng of the order, the di stri ctcourtdi d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n fi nd i ng that the sc al es of equi ty t i p i n S hel l ’ s f avor. 4 . P u b l i c In terest F in a lly , w e m u s t d e c id e w h e th e rth e d is tr ic t c o u rt ab u s e dits d is c r e tio n in c onc l udi ng tha ta n i nj unc t i on i s i n the publ i c i nt e r e s t . C ongr e s s ha s r e c ogni z e d a p u b lic in te r e s t in th e “e x p e d itio u s a n do r d e r lyd e v e lo p m e n t” o f th e O C S , se e Amo c o Pr o d. Co . v . Vi l l. o f Ga mb e l l , AK, 480 U . S . 531, 546 n. 11 ( 1987) ( quot i ng 4 3 U .S .C . § 1 3 3 2 ( 3 ) ) , a n d S h e ll’s A r c tic O C S p r o je c t is au th o r iz e db yla w . G r e e n p e a c e U S A a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt f a ile dto c o n s id e rth e p u b lic i nt e r e s ti n e nvi r onm e nt a l pr ot e c t i on be f or e i s s ui ng the i nj unc t i on. A f t e rr e m i ndi ng the courtof the D e e

pw ate rH

or i z on d is a s te r , G r e e n p e a c e U S A a r g u e s th a t th e r e is a n a m p l i f

i e d p u b l i c i n t e r e s ti n “ a l l o w[ i n g ] th e p u b l i c , i n c l u d i n g Gr e e n p e a c e US A, to m o n ito r[ o il d r illin g ] a c tiv itie s .” Fi n a l l y , Gr e e n p e a c e USA a r g u e s th a tOCSL A r e c o g n iz e s a n in te r e s t in “p u b lic p a rtic ip a tio n a n de n v ir o n m e n ta l p r o te c tio n ” th a t is furthere d b y group s l i ke i t se l f. Th e d i s tr i c tc o u rtc o n s i d e r e dth e p u b l i c i n t e r e s ti n h a v i n g G r e e n p e a c e U SA m on i t or S hel l ’ s A rc t i c dri l l i ng ac t i vi t i es . In fa ct , the courtagre ed w i th G re enpeace22

U S A ’ s O C S L A ar gu m ent , st at i ng that“ O C S L A re cogn i ze s the i m po rt antrol e that envi ronm ent al organi za t i on s s uch as G re enpeace U S A m aypl ayi n l egal proceedi ng s r egar di ng the devel op m entof the O ut erC on t i nent al S hel f. ” Sh e ll O f f sh o re , 864 F . S upp. 2d a t852. T he c ourta l s o a c know l e dge d tha tthe i nj unc t i on coul d i m pact“ G re enpeace U S A ’ s otherw i se l egal ac t i vi t i es . ” I d. I tr e s ponde d by cr af t i ng a narrow i nj un ct i ve order thatproh i bi t ed on l y i l l egal and t ort i ou s c on du ct a n d b ye x p r e s s lyin v itin g G r e e n p e a c e U S A to s e e kto m o d if

y[ th e ] o r d e rs o a s to p e rm it G r e e n p e a c e to m o r e c lo s e ly m on i t or S hel l ’ s a ct i vi t i es w i thi n the sa fe ty z on es es t abl i shed by [the] order atsuch spec i fi c t i m es , l ocat i on s, and con di t i on s that[the] court m a yor de ra f

t e re a c h pa rtyha s be e n a c c or de d a n opportuni tyt o be he a r d on a nys uc h m ot i on. I d. at85 6. W e c anno tsay thatthi s tre atm entof pu bl i c i nt er es tfa ct ors c on st i tut ed a n abus e of

di s c r e t i on. CONCL US I ON T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n g rant i ng S hel l ’ s m ot i on for a pr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on, w hi c h i s a m pl ys upport e d bythe r e c or d. C ons e que nt l y , the p r e lim in a ryin

ju n c tio n o r d e ris AF F I RME D.23 C ou n se lof R ec ord R e be c c aJ . H oz ubi n a nd M i c ha e l A . M obe r l y( a r gue d) , L a w O f f i c e of H oz ubi n & M o b e r ly , A n c h o r a g e , A la s k a , f o rD e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t. Je ff re y W . L eppo (argued), R yan P . S t ee n and Ja son T . M organ, S t oel R i ves , LL P S ea tt l e, W as hi ng t on , and Jam es T orgers on , S t oel R i ves L L P , A ncho ra ge, A l as ka, fo r P l ai n t i ffs-A p p el l ees.A s di sc usse d m ore f ul l y bel ow , G re enpeace U S A i s one of si xt ee n 1 i nd ependentvo t i ng m em bers of S t i cht i ng G re enpeace C ou nci l (a . k. a. , G re enpeace I n te rn a tio n a l) , a n d is th e o n lyG r e e n p e a c e e n tityth a t is ap artyto th is c a s e . S h e l lO f f s h or e , I n c . v. G r e e n p e ac e , I n c . , N o. 12- 35332 M . S M I T H , C ir c u it J u d g e , c o n c u rr in g in p a rt a n dd is s e n tin g in p a rt: I co n cu r w i th P art s III an d IV o f th e m aj o ri ty o p i n i o n th atd i scu ss ju s tic iab ilitya n d ju r is d ic tio n . I p a rt w a y s w ith th e m a jo r ity , h o w e v e r , w h e r e it h o ld s th a t S h e ll m a yim p u te th e a c tio n s o f o th e rin d e p e n d e n t G r e e n p e a c e e n titie s to G r e e npe a c e U S A i n or de rt o m e e tS he l l ’ s bur de n of pr oof . B e c aus e I c a nnot 1 s upportthe i m pos i t i on of l e ga l s a nc t i ons on G r e e npe a c e U S A ba s e d, i n s i gni f i c a nt p a rt, o n th e c o n d u c t o f

o th e r s th a t G r e e n p e a c e U S A d o e s n o t c o n tr o l, I r e s p e c tf u lly d is s e n t. I. T h e m aj o ri ty cl ai m s th atG reen p eace U S A w as p ro p erl y en j o i n ed b ecau se th e “e v id e n c e s h o w e d th a t s to p p in g S h e ll a n do th e ro il c o m p a n ie s f r o m d r illin g in the A r c t i c i s m or e l i ke l ytha n notone of the ove r a l l pr i or i tys tr a t e gi e s of G r e e npe a c e W or l dw i de , a s w e l l a s of G r e e npe a c e U S A . ” ( M a j . O p. a t16) ( quot i ng Sh el l O f f shore I nc. v. G re enpeace, Inc. , 864 F . S upp. 2d 839, 848 ( D . A l a s ka 2 0 1 2 ) ) . O f

c o u r s e , G r e e n p e a c e U S A d o e s n o t d is p u te th a t it s e e k s to s to p S h e ll fr om dri l l i ng i n the A rc t i c. R ather, G re enpeace U S A di sput es thatS hel l has pres ent ed suff

i ci entevi dence t o sho w thatG re enpeace U S A w i l l l i kel y use i l legal 

# FI LED MA R 12 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALST he re cord i s c l ear thatthe N o b le D isco verer w a s boa r de d bym e m be r s of 2 G re enpeace N ew Z ea l and, w hi l e the N ordi c a a nd Fenni ca w e r e boa r de d by m em bers of G re enpeace N ordi c. 2 m eth o d s t o achi eve i t s goal . B ec ause G re enpeace U S A i s unq uest i on abl y e nt i t l ed t o l aw ful l y prot es tS hel l ’ s dri l l i ng ac t i vi t i es , the re al i ss ue i n thi s c as e i s w hether S h e ll h a s s u f

f ic ie n tlyp r o v e d th a t G r e e n p e a c e U S A is lik e lyto ta k e “im m in e n t” u n la w f u l a c tio n u n le s s it is e n

jo in e d . Se e L u

ja n v . D e fe n de rs o f W ild life , 5 0 4 U . S. 5 5 5 , 5 6 0

– 6 1 ( 1 9 9 2 ) . R el yi ng heavi l y on evi dence of previ ou s unl aw ful encoun t er s betw ee n

“ G re enpeace ac t i vi st s” and S hel l , such as the bo ar di ng of the N ob le D isc over erin N ew Z ea l and and the bo ar di ng of the N ordi c a a nd Fenni ca in F in la n d , th e m a jo r ity c o n c lu d e s th a t S h e ll h a s m e t its b u r d e n . T h e m a jo r ity ’s r e lia n c e o n th e s e a c ts is troub l i ng , ho w ever , because e ven the m aj ori ty a dm i t s thatG re enpeace U S A pl ay ed no parti n these event s. In order t o suffi ci ent l y l i nk these ac t i vi t i es t o G re enpeace 2 U S A , th e m a

jo r itya d v a n c e s tw o th e o r ie s , b o th o f w h ic h a r e ill- c o n c e iv e d . F ir s t, th e m a jo r itym a k e s th e s ta rtlin g c la im th a t th e “n a tu r e o f th e le g a l r e la tio n s h ip betw ee n G re enpeace U S A , G re enpeace Int ernat i on al , and v ar i ou s nat i on al G r e e n p e a c e o f

f ic e s h a s n o b e a r in g o n th is ap p e a l.” ( M a j. O p . a t 1 5 ) . A l t e rna t i ve l y , the m a

j or i tyc l a i m s tha tbe c aus e G r e e npe a c e U S A r e port e d on the u n la w f u l a c tio n s o f

o th e rG r e e n p e a c e e n titie s o n its w e b s ite , a n dm a d e r e f e r e n c e toL eo n a rd v. P a rry , 21 9 F . 3d 25 , 29 (1stC i r. 20 00 ) ( “ [E ] ven the m ostl i bera l 3 in te rp r e ta tio n o f

‘m is ta k e ’ c a n n o t in c lu d e ad e lib e r a te d e c is io n n o t to s u e ap a rty w h o s e id e n tityp la in tif

f k n e w f r o m th e o u ts e t.” ) ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) ; Sp ri ng m an v. A IG M kt g. , Inc. , 52 3 F . 3d 68 5, 69 0 (7th C i r. 20 08 ) ( “ the m ai nt enance f or ye ar s of a su i tag ai n sta p arty k n o w n b y th e p l ai n t i ff t o b e th e w ro n g o n e t o su e w as an ab u se of l egal proces s” ). 3 th e me mb e r s o f

s u c h G r e e n p e a c e g r o u p s a s “ o u ra c t i v i s t s , ” G r e e n p e a c e U SA

“ e n d o r s e d ” th o s e a c t i o n s , th e r e b yp e rmi tt i n g u s t o h o l dG r e e n p e a c e U SA r e s pons i bl e f

orthe unde r l y i ng c onduc ti n thi s l i t i ga t i on. ( M a j . O p. 6, 19) . F orthe reaso n s d i scu ssed b el o w , I d i sag ree w i th b o th p ro p o si t i o n s. A . T h e S ep a ra te L eg a lS ta tu s o f G reen p ea ce U S A Is R el ev a n t to T h i s A p p e al I t is a x io m a tic th a t ap la in tif f m u s t s u e th e p r o p e rp a rtyin o r d e rto o b ta in r e lie f . Se e, e . g. , Kr u

p s kiv . Co s ta Cr o c i e r e S.p . A. , 130 S . C t . 2485, 2494 ( 2010) ( “[ M ]a k in g ad e lib e r a te c h o ic e to s u e o n e p a rtyin s te a do f a n o th e rw h ile f

u lly unde r s t a ndi ng the f

a c tua l a nd l e ga l di f

f e r e nc e s be tw e e n the tw o pa rt i e s i s the a n tith e s is o f

m a k in g am is ta k e c o n c e rn in g th e p r o p e rp a rty ’s id e n tity .” ) . I t is 3 s im ila r lyw e ll r e c o g n iz e d th a t ap e r s o n ( o rc o rp o r a tio n ) c a n b e h e ldle g a lly r e s p o n s ib le o n lyf

o rh is o w n a c tio n s , ab s e n t e x tr a o r d in a ryc ir c u m s ta n c e s . Se e, e . g. , N . A . A . C . P . v . C lai borne H ardw ar e C o. , 4 5 8 U .S . 8 8 6 , 9 2 0 ( 1 9 8 2 ) ( “C iv il liab ility ma yn o tb e i mp o s e d me r e l yb e c au s e a n i n d i v i d u a l b e l o n g e dt o ag r o u p , s o meA pp el l ee S hel l O ff shore I nc. i s aw ho l l y ow ned sub si di ary of S O I F i nance 4 I n c . , w h i c h i s aw h o l l yo w n e d s u b s i d i a ryo f Sh e l l U S E& P I n v e s tme n t s LLC, w h i ch i s a w h o l l y o w n ed su b si d i ary o f S h el l O i l C o m p an y, w h i ch , i n tu rn , i s a w ho l l y ow ned sub si di ary of S hel l P etrol eum Inc. , w hi ch i s aw ho l l y ow ned subsi di ary of S hel l P etrol eum N . V . , w hi ch i s aw ho l l y ow ned sub si di ary of R oyal D ut ch S hel l pl c. (A pp el l ee ’ s C orpo ra t e D i sc l osure S t at em ent ). S hel l O ff shore I nc. i s i t se l f the parentcorporat i on of E nt erpri se O i l N orth A m er i caInc. , w hi ch i n turn is th e p a r e n t c o m p a n yo f S h e ll G u lf

o f M e x ic o I n c ., th e o th e rS h e ll ap p e lle e in th is c a s e . I d. C o n s id e rth e f

o llo w in g e x c h a n g e w ith S h e ll’s c o u n s e l a t o r a l a r g u m e n t: 5 T he C ourt : I a m ve ryw e l l a w a r e tha tS he l l ha s thous a nds of c orpor a t e a nd other e nt i t i es and I have never hear d a S hel l re pres ent at i ve basi ca l l y s aythese ar e a ll w o rth le s s ; w e s h o u ldtr e a t th e m a ll a s ju s t o n e e n tity . M r. L eppo : A nd I’ m no tsayi ng thatyour ho no r . . . I w i l l never m ake that a r g u m e n t. 4 m em bers of w hi ch com m i tt ed ac t s of vi ol ence . ”) ; Fi rs t N at . C i t y B an k v . B an co P ar a E l C om e r c i o E

x te r i orde C uba (B an ce c) , 462 U . S . 611, 625 ( 1983) (“ S epar at e l egal pers on al i ty has been descr i bed as an al m osti nd i spensabl e a spec t o f th e p u b lic c o rp o r a tio n .” ) . C e rta in lyS h e ll u n d e r s ta n d s th e s e p r in c ip le s w e ll— its ow n c orpor a t e di s c l os ur e s t a t e m e ntt a ke s up ne a r l yaf ul l pa ge of

i t s a ns w e r i ng b r ie f , lis tin g a ll o f

th e s u b s id ia r ie s a n de n titie s S h e ll a d m itte d lyr e lie s o n to lim it 4 i t s ow n l i abi l i ty . Y e tw he n i tc om e s t o G r e e npe a c e U S A , w ha ti s s auc e f orthe 5 g o o s e is ap p a r e n tlyn o t s au c e f o rth e g a n d e r .5

T he m a j or i tyc l a i m s tha tG r e e npe a c e U S A c a n be he l d t o a c c ountf orthe a c tio n s o f

le g a llys e p a r a te G r e e n p e a c e e n titie s . B u t w e ll- e s tab lis h e dla w , a s w e ll as basi c f ai rnes s, di ct at es otherw i se . A s the S up re m e C ou rtno t ed i n a si m i l arca se : T h e ta in t o f

v io le n c e c o lo r e dth e c o n d u c t o f s o m e p e titio n e r s . T hey, of course , m aybe hel d l i abl e f or the consequences of thei r vi ol entdeeds. T he bu rden of dem on stra t i ng thati tcol ored the ent i re col l ec t i ve ef

fort , ho w ever , i s notsa t i sf i ed by evi dence thatvi ol ence o ccu rred . . . S u ch a ch aract eri zat i o n m u stb e su p p o rt ed b y fi n d i n g s th a t a d e q u a te lyd is c lo s e th e e v id e n tia ryb a s is f o rc o n c lu d in g th a t spec i f i c part i es a g r e e d to u s e u n la w f u l m e a n s [ .] C lai borne H

ardw ar e C o. , 4 5 8 U .S . a t 9 3 3 ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ) . A p p ly in g th e s e p r in c ip le s to th e c a s e b e f o r e u s , G r e e n p e a c e U S A s h o u ld onl ybe l e ga l l ys a nc t i one d f orthe a c t i ons of

othe ri nde pe nde nte nt i t i e s on a s uf f i c i e nts how i ng tha tG r e e npe a c e U S A s i gni f i c a nt l yc oor di na t e d w i th, e n c o u r a g e d , o rc o n tr o lle d th e a c tio n s o f th o s e g r o u p s . Se e, e . g. , id. a t932–34 ( the fa ctthatce rt ai n act i vi st s e ng aged i n u nl aw ful cond uctcann otbe attri bu t ed t o o ther prot es torgani ze rs un l es s i tcoul d b e s ho w n thatthe l att erhad p er sonal l y c om m i tt ed o rau th o r iz e d th e u n la w f u l a c ts ) ; B an ce c , 46 2 U . S . at62 6– 29 (e xp l ai ni ng that

“ l i m i t ed l i abi l i ty i s the rul e, no tthe except i on , ” and thu s one corporat e e nt i ty m ay o n l y b e h el d l i ab l e fo r th e act i o n s o f an o th er “ w h ere a co rp o rat e en t i ty i s so e x te n s iv e lyc o n tr o lle d b yits o w n e rth a t ar e la tio n s h ip o f p r in c ip a l a n da g e n t is c r e a te d .” ) .6

T h e r e c o r d h e r e , h o w e v e r , d o e s n o t d e m o n s tr a te s u c h p e rv a s iv e c o n tr o l. I n s te a d , th e r e c o r d in d ic a te s th a t G r e e n p e a c e U S A f u n c tio n s a s a n o p e r a tio n a lly i nd ependentm em ber of S t i cht i ng G re enpeace C ou nci l (a . k. a. , G re enpeace Int ernat i on al ), the A m st er dam -bas ed “ pare nt ” e nt i ty thatl i ce nses the G re enpeace na m e t o gr oups l i ke G r e e npe a c e U S A . T oge the rw i th the othe rf i f t e e n vot i ng m em b er s o f G re en p ea ce In tern atio n al, G re en p ea ce U S A h elp s s et G re en p ea ce ’s w or l dw i de c a m pa i gn pr i or i t i e s , s uc h a s pr e ve nt i ng oi l dr i l l i ng i n the A r c t i c , or lo g g in g in th e A m a z o n . B u t w h e n it c o m e s to th e m e th o d s a n dta c tic s u s e dto a d v a n c e th o s e p r io r itie s , th e r e c o r dm a k e s c le a rth a t e a c h G r e e n p e a c e lic e n s e e is aut on om ou s, and fre e t o cho ose the t ac t i cs m ostl i kel y t o res on at e w i th i t s l ocal const i tuency. T hu s, w hi l e G re enpeace N ew Z ea l and and G re enpeace N ordi c m ay s e e k t o a dva nc e the gl oba l “ s t op S he l l ” c a m pa i gn thr ough the unl a w f ul boa r di ng of S hel l vess el s, G re enpeace U S A m aychoo se m ore beni gn t ac t i cs , l i ke the l ett er w r itin g c a m p a ig n G r e e n p e a c e U S A a d m its it c o o r d in a te dth r o u g h its w e b s ite . U nde r s t ood i n i t s c orr e c tf a c tua l c ont e xt , i ti s l e ga l l yi m pr ope rt o i m put e the in d e p e n d e n t ta c tic a l c h o ic e s o f o th e rG r e e n p e a c e lic e n s e e s to G r e e n p e a c e U S A in th is li ti g atio n . Y et u n d erth e m ajo rity’s n ew ly an n o u n ce dru le, G re en p ea ce U S A ’s s e p a r a te le g a l s ta tu s “h a s n o b e a r in g ” o n o u rd e c is io n . O f c o u r s e , a s p r e v io u s ly n o ted , co u rts h av e c o n sisten tl y h eld ju st th e o p p o site, an dfo u n dth at a p ar ty’sScal es v. U ni ted States , 3 6 7 U .S . 2 0 3 , 2 2 8

– 3 0 ( 1 9 6 1 ) ; Sc hw ar e v . B d. of 6 B a rE x a m . o f S ta te o f N .M. , 3 5 3 U .S . 2 3 2 , 2 4 4 ( 1 9 5 7 ) ; A nde rs on v . A b b o tt , 321 U .S . 3 4 9 , 3 5 7

– 6 2 ( 1 9 4 4 ) ; L ou isi an a-P aci f i c Corp. v. A SA R C O , Inc. , 5 F . 3d 431, 4 3 3

– 3 4 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 3 ) . C ontr aryt o the m a

j or i ty ’ s a s s e rt i on i n i t s ow n f ootnot e s e ve n, the r e i s no 7 j us t i f i c a t i on f ordi s t i ngui s hi ng be tw e e n type s of r e que s t e d r e l i e f

w he n c ons i de r i ng w he the rapl a i nt i f

f ha s a de qua t e l ys ue d the pr ope rpa rty . T o obt a i n any l egal re l i ef , apl a i nt i f f m us ts ue the c orr e c te nt i ty . A nyothe rrul e i s s i m pl ynons e ns i c a l a nd c o n tr a ryto lo n g - e s tab lis h e d p r e c e d e n t. Se e, e . g. , B an ce c , 462 U . S . a t626–29 7 i ndi v i dual

c u lp ab ilityis ak e yf

a c to rin f a s h io n in g a n ap p r o p r ia te le g a l r e m e d y . Se e, e . g. , C lai borne H

ardw ar e C o. , 458 U . S . a t932–34. T he m a j or i tydoe s not 6 a de qua t e l ye xpl a i n w hythi s c a s e s houl d be de c i de d a nydi f f e r e nt l y , a nd abs e nt such j ust i fi ca t i on , I c anno tendo rs e i t s perm i ss i ve and p erni ci ou s new rul e. 7 Wi th o u ts u f

f i c i e n tp r o o f

o f wh a tGr e e n p e a c e US A its e lf has don e t o threa t en S h e ll’s A r c tic d r illin g o p e r a tio n s , I w o u ldn o t g r a n t ap r e lim in a ryin ju n c tio n . B . M e r e E n d or s e m e n t of C r i m i n alC on d u c t C an n ot S u p p or t an I n j u n c t i on I n a d d itio n to im p r o p e r lyr e ly in g o n th e d ir e c t e v id e n c e o f ille g a l a c ts c om m i tt e d bynon- pa rtyG r e e npe a c e e nt i t i e s , the m a j or i tya l s o r e l i e s on G re enpeace U S A ’ s “ endo rs em ent ” of s uch act s t o sup po rti t s c on cl usi on that G re enpeace U S A w as prop er l y e nj oi ned h er e. P utsi m pl y, the m aj ori ty c l ai m s that G r e e n p e a c e U S A c a n b e e n jo in e d , a t le a s t in p a rt, b e c au s e G r e e n p e a c e U S A w r o teC o n tr a ryto w h a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt f o u n d , G r e e n p e a c e U S A d e n ie dth a t it 8 i nt ended t o i l l egal l y i nt er fe re w i th S hel l ’ s a ct i vi t i es . G re enpeace U S A ’ s s w orn deni al i n i t s ver i fi ed answ erw as al l thatw as nece ss ary, si nce S hel l has the bu rden o f p r o o f in th is c a s e . See T

halhe i m e rv . C i t

yof San D i ego , 645 F . 3d 1109, 1116 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 1 ) . 8 f a vor abl yaboutthe unl a w f ul a c t i vi t i e s of

gr oups l i ke G r e e npe a c e N e w Z e a l a nd, and d es cr i bed tho se grou ps’ ac t i vi st s a s “ ou r a ct i vi st s. ” A gai n, I di sa gree . M yf ir s t g r o u n d f

o rd is a g r e e m e n t is f

a c tu a l. A lth o u g h S h e ll tr ie s its b e s t to pai ntG re enpeace U S A ’ s s t at em ent s a s i m m i nentthrea t s, they are cl earl y no such thi ng . T hatG re enpeace U S A offi ci al l y r ef erre d t o tho se m em bers of G re enpeace N ew Z ea l and w ho un l aw ful l y boarded the N ob le D isc over era s “ ourbr a ve a c tiv is ts ,” a n d d e s c r ib e d th e in c id e n t a s “o n lyth e f ir s t c h ap te rin w h a t w ill undoubt e dl ybe a n e pi c ba tt l e , ” i s unr e m a rkabl e . T he s e s t a t e m e nt s s a ynothi ng ab o u tG reen p eace U S A ’ s o wn pl a nne d i nvol ve m e nti n a ny“ e pi c ba tt l e , ” l e ta l one shed l i gh ton G re enpeace U S A ’ s c on t em pl at ed “ batt l e” t ac t i cs . R ather, G r e e n p e a c e U S A ’s s ta te m e n ts a r e f u llyc o n s is te n t w ith its c la im th a t it p la n s to p ro t estS h el l ’ s A rct i c d ri l l i n g u si n g o n l y l eg al m eth o d s. 8 M o r e im p o rta n tly , h o w e v e r , th e m a jo r ity ’s “e n d o r s e m e n t” te s t is le g a llyillad v i sed , b ecau se i ti s l i k el y t o h av e an u n i n t en d ed ch i l l i n g effect on o th erw i se p ro tected sp ee ch . N o p ar ty to th es e p ro ce ed in g s c laim s th at G re en p ea ce U S A ’s b lo g p o s ts f

a ll o u ts id e th e p r o te c tio n s o f th e F ir s t A m e n d m e n t. See B ra n den b u rg9

v . O h io , 39 5 U . S . 44 4, 44 7– 48 (196 9) (“ advo ca cyof the use of f orce or of l aw vi ol a t i on e xc e ptw he r e s uc h a dvoc a c yi s di r e c t e d t o i nc i t i ng orpr oduc i ng i m m i ne nt la w le s s a c tio n ” is p r o te c te d u n d e rth e C o n s titu tio n ) ; P lanne d P ar e nthood of C o lu m b ia /W

illa m e tte, I

n c . v . A m . C o a l. o

f L ife A c tiv is ts , 2 9 0 F .3 d1 0 5 8 , 1 0 7 2 ( 9 th C i r. 2 0 0 2 ) (en b an c) (“If A C L A h ad m erel y endo rs ed ore nc our a ge d the vi ol e nt a c tio n s o f

o th e r s , its s p e e c h w o u ldb e p r o te c te d .” ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ) . P r a is in g c iv il di s obe di e nc e a nd pr om i s i ng f urthe rpr ot e s ti n no w a yr i s e s t o the l e ve l of in c ite m e n t o ratru e th r e a t. Se e id. a t1089 ( K oz i ns ki , J . di s s e nt i ng) ( “ T he di ff er ence betw ee n a true threa tand p rot ec t ed express i on i s thi s: A true threa t w arns of vi ol ence or other harm thatthe spea ker c o n tr o ls . ”) (e m ph as i s a dd ed). Y et by prem i si ng the grantof a pre l i m i naryi nj un ct i on , atl ea sti n p art , on G re enpeace U S A ’ s c l earl y prot ec t ed po l i t i ca l spee ch, the m aj ori ty i nd i re ct l y penal i ze s G r e e npe a c e U S A f

orbe ha vi ortha tc a nnotbe puni s he d di r e c t l y . C hi e f J udge K ozi nski , no w i n the m aj ori ty, st at ed the i ss ue w el l i n d i ss ent : “ L i ke C lai borne H a rdw a re , thi s c a s e i nvol ve s ac onc e rt e d e f f ortbyava r i e tyof

gr oups a nd i nd i vi du al s i n p ursui tof a c om m on po l i t i ca l cause. S om e of the ac t i vi t i es w er e l aw ful , others w er e not . In bo th cas es , there w as evi dence thatthe vari ou s pl ay er s c om m uni c a t e d w i th e a c h othe ra nd, a tt i m e s , e nga ge d i n c onc e rt e d a c t i on. T he S u p r e m e C o u rt, h o w e v e r , h e ldth a t m e r e a s s o c ia tio n w ith g r o u p s o rin d iv id u a ls10

w h o p u rsu e u n l aw fu l co n d u cti s an i n su ffi ci en tb asi s fo r th e i m p o si t i o n o f l i ab i l i ty, unl e s s i ti s s how n tha tthe de f e nda nt s a c tua l l ypa rt i c i pa t e d i n orauthor i z e d the i l l egal cond uct . ” I

d. a t 1 0 9 5 . B e c au s e th e r e c o r d h e r e d o e s n o t s h o w th a t G r e e np e a c e U S A a c tu a lly p art i ci p at ed i n o r au th o ri zed m u ch o f th e i l l eg al co n d u ctrel i ed o n b y th e m aj o ri ty, I r e s p e c tf u llyd is s e n t.