Case Name: STATE OF ARIZONA et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; BROADWAY-HALE STORES, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; SAFEWAY STORES, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent; HOMART DEVELOPMENT CO., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1975-12-19
Citations: 526 F.2d 1391
Docket Number: Nos. 73-3577, 73-3588, 74-1001, 74-1002, 74-1009 and 74-1013
Parties: STATE OF ARIZONA et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. BROADWAY-HALE STORES, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. SAFEWAY STORES, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. HOMART DEVELOPMENT CO., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
Judges: Before ELY, TRASK and SNEED, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 526
Pages: 1391–1391

Head Matter:
STATE OF ARIZONA et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. BROADWAY-HALE STORES, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. SAFEWAY STORES, INC., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. HOMART DEVELOPMENT CO., Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
Nos. 73-3577, 73-3588, 74-1001, 74-1002, 74-1009 and 74-1013.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Dec. 19, 1975.
Patrick Murphy, Asst. Atty. Gen. (argued), Phoenix, Ariz., for petitioner in 73-3577.
Henry C. Thumann (argued), of O’Melveny & Myers, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner in 73 — 3588.
David J. Toomey (argued), New York City, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner in 73-3588.
Michael Graves, Atty. (argued), Lands and Natural Resources Div., U. S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before ELY, TRASK and SNEED, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
No Petitioner, pursuant to the request in our Opinion of September 8, 1975, informed this Court within 21 days thereafter of issues other than those dealt with by our September 8, 1975 Opinion which it wished this Court to review. Under these circumstances, it is proper for this Court to dismiss finally these petitions for review. Each party shall bear its own costs. It is so ordered.
Dismissed.