AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE ET AL.

v.

GORSUCH, ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, ET AL.; AND CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS V. GORSUCH, ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

• Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 705 F.2d 506 (D.C. Cir. 1983)
  …Petroleum Institute v. Costle, 665 F. 2d 1176, 1191 (D.C. Cir.1981) (requiring parties to raise objections which arise after the end of the comment period with “reasonable specificity” in a petition to the agency for reconsideration), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1034, 102 S.Ct. 1737, 72 L.Ed.2d 152 (1982). Here, however, SRTF raises a number of specific objections to the Sobotka studies.96 We therefore turn to the standard for reviewing those objections. In general, there are two possible sources of reversible…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Rasimas v. Mich. Dep't OF Mental Health, 714 F.2d 614 (6th Cir. 1983)
  …5. Therefore, MDMH asserts the present action was not formally “filed” with the EEOC until four days after the 300 day filing period had expired. We disagree. In Wiltshire v. Standard Oil of California, 652 F. 2d 837 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1034, 102 S.Ct. 1737, 72 L.Ed.2d 153 (1982), the Ninth Circuit exhaustively examined Mohasco and determined that it should not be applied to claims which were pending on the date the Supreme Court decision was announced. Wiltshire, 652 F. 2d at 842. The…
• Edwards v. Teamsters Local Union NO. 36, 719 F.2d 1036 (9th Cir. 1983)
  …81 U.S. 618, 629, 85 S.Ct. 1731, 1738, 14 L.Ed.2d 601, 608 (1965); Cipriano v. City of Houma, 395 U.S. 701, 706, 89 S.Ct. 1897, 1900, 23 L.Ed.2d 647, 652 (1969)); accord Wiltshire v. Standard Oil Co., 652 F. 2d 837, 840 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1034, 102 S.Ct. 1737, 72 L.Ed.2d 153 (1982); Singer v. Flying Tiger Line, 652 F. 2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir.1981). The first criterion is met because Del Costello effectively overrules the case relied on above, Price v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.,…