Case Name: IN RE: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and United States Environmental Protection Agency Final Rule: Clean Water Rule: Definition of "Waters of the United States," 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015), Murray Energy Corporation, et al., Petitioners, v. United States Department of Defense, Department of the Army Corps of Engineers; and United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al., Respondents
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-02-28
Citations: 713 F. App'x 489
Docket Number: Case Nos. 15-3751, et al.
Parties: IN RE: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and United States Environmental Protection Agency Final Rule: Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States,” 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015), Murray Energy Corporation, et al., Petitioners, v. United States Department of Defense, Department of the Army Corps of Engineers; and United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al., Respondents.
Judges: BEFORE: KEITH, McKEAGUE and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 713
Pages: 489–491

Head Matter:
IN RE: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and United States Environmental Protection Agency Final Rule: Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States,” 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015), Murray Energy Corporation, et al., Petitioners, v. United States Department of Defense, Department of the Army Corps of Engineers; and United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al., Respondents.
Case Nos. 15-3751, et al.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Filed February 28, 2018
Brooks Meredith Smith, Justin T. Wong, Troutman Sanders, Richmond, VA, for Petitioner
Kristy A. N. Bulleit, Karma B. Brown, Kerry L. McGrath, Andrew Turner, Hun-ton & Williams, Washington, DC, for In-tervenor Utility Water Act Group
Jessica O’Donnell, Amy J. Dona, Andrew J. Doyle, Martha Mann, U.S. Department of Justice, Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC, for Respondents United States Environmental Protection Agency, Gina McCarthy, United States Army Corps of Engineers, John McHugh, Jo-Ellen Darcy
Timothy S. Bishop, Mayer Brown, Chicago, IL, Michael B. Kimberly, Mayer Brown, Washington, DC, John Quentin Melcher Riegel, National Association of Manufacturers, Washington, DC, for Inter-venor National Association of Manufacturers
Jennifer Ann Sorenson, Natural Resources Defense Council, San Francisco, CA, for Intervenors Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., National Wildlife Federation
Catherine Wannamaker, Christopher Kaltman DeScherer, Senior Attorney, Southern Environmental Law Center, Charleston, SC, Megan Hinkle, Southern Environmental Law Center, Atlanta, GA, for Intervenors One Hundred Miles, South Carolina Coastal Conservation League
James N. Saul, Lewis & Clark Law School, Portland, OR, for Intervenors Wat-erkeeper Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Humboldt Baykeeper, Russian Riverkeeper, Monterey Coastkeeper, Snake River Wat-erkeeper, Upper Missouri Waterkeeper, Turtle Island Restoration Network
Janette K. Brimmer, Jennifer C. Chavez, Earthjustice, Seattle, WA, for Interve-nors Puget Soundkeeper, Sierra Club
Philip Bein, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of New York, Albany, NY, Timothy Hoffman, Office of the Attorney General of New York, Buffalo, NY, for Intervenor State of New York
Kirsten S. P. Rigney, Office of the Attorney General of Connecticut, Hartford, CT, for Intervenor State of Connecticut
Edward Grant Bohlen, Office of the Attorney General of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, for Intervenor State of Hawaii
Seth Schofield, Office of the Attorney General Massachusetts Energy and Environment Bureau, Boston, MA, for Interve-nor State of Massachusetts
Lorelei M. Bensel, Oregon Department of Justice, Salem, OR, Paul Garrahan, Oregon Department of Justice, Natural Resources Section, Portland, OR, for Interve-nor State of Oregon
Benjamin D. Battles,.Office of the Attorney General of Vermont, Montpelier, VT, for Intervenor State of Vermont
Ronald Lavigne, Office of the Attorney General, Ecology Division, Olympia, WA, for Intervenor State of Washington
Loren L. AliKhan, Office of the Attorney General of the District of Columbia, Washington, DC, for Intervenor District of Columbia
Andre Monette, Best, Best & Krieger, Washington, DC, for Amici Curiae Association of California Water Agencies, National Water Resources Association, Eastern Municipal Water District, San Diego County Water Authority, Santa Fe Irrigation District, Helix Water District, Santa Margarita Water District
L. Rachel Lerman, Barnes & Thorn-burg, Los Angeles, CA, for Amicus Curiae 21 Senators and 67 Representatives
Lisa Ann Kirschner, Parsons, Behle & Latimer, Salt Lake City, UT, for Amicus Curiae National Rural Water Association
Richard Abbott Samp, Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, DC, for Ami-cus Curiae Washington Legal Foundation
Charles C. Caldart, National Environmental Law Center, Seattle, WA, Heather A. Govern, National Environmental Law Center, Boston, MA, for Amici Curiae Local Elected Officials, Small Business Founders, Owners or Operators
Susannah Weaver, Donahue & Goldberg, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae Environmental and Administrative Law Professors
Royal Gardner, Stetson University College of Law, Gulfport, FL, Stephanie Tai, University of Wisconsin Law School, Madison, WI, for Amicus Curiae Wetland and Water Scientists
Sam Kalen, Law Office, Laramie, WY, for Amicus Curiae Current and Former Members of Congress
Melinda Kassen, Waterjamin Legal & Policy Consulting, Boulder, CO, for Amici Curiae Trout Unlimited, American Fly Fishing Trade Association, Izaak Walton League of America, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
BEFORE: KEITH, McKEAGUE and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
These consolidated actions challenging the validity of the "Clean Water Rule," 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015), having been transferred to this court by the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation; and
This court having issued its jurisdictional ruling on February 22, 2016, holding that plaintiffs' challenges are subject to direct review in this court, 817 F.3d 261; and
The Supreme Court having granted cer-tiorari and having on January 22, 2018, reversed the majority jurisdictional ruling and remanded the matter to this court with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, Nat'l Ass'n of Mfrs. v. Dep't of Defense, — U.S.—, 138 S.Ct. 617, 199 L.Ed.2d 501 (2018); and
The Supreme Court having issued its final judgment on February 23, 2018; now therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this court's order of stay dated October 9,2015, staying the Clean Water Rute nationwide, see In re E.P.A., 803 F.3d 804 (6th Cir. 2009), is VACATED; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all petitioners' challenges to the Clean Water Rule consolidated in this action are hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.