Opinion ID: 2809284
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: whether delayed review would cause

Text: hardship to the plaintiffs; (2) whether judicial intervention would inappropriately interfere with further administrative action; and (3) whether the courts would benefit from further factual development of the issues presented. COTTONWOOD ENVTL. LAW CTR. V. USFS 19 Ohio Forestry Ass’n, Inc. v. Sierra Club, 523 U.S. 726, 733 (1998); Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 450 F.3d 930, 940 (9th Cir. 2006) (applying this test to an ESA claim involving FWS). Judicial intervention does not interfere with further administrative action when an agency’s decision is “at an administrative resting place.” Citizens for Better Forestry v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 341 F.3d 961, 977 (9th Cir. 2003). Further, no additional factual development is necessary after a procedural injury has occurred. See Ohio Forestry Ass’n, 523 U.S. at 737 (holding that a procedural dispute is ripe “at the time the [procedural] failure takes place”).