United States Ninth Circuit

Summary judgment in favor of defendant, regarding six biological operation opinions it issued, is reversed where its critical habitat analysis was fatally flawed because it relied on an unlawful regulatory definition of "adverse modification" and it impermissibly substituted "late successional reserves" for critical habitat.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/07/2004
• Decided 08/06/2004
• Published 08/09/2004

Judges

• GOULD, Circuit Judge:, Before:  BRUNETTI, McKEOWN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Stephanie M. Parent, Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center, Portland, OR, for the plaintiffs-appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• R. Justin Smith, United States Department of Justice, Environmental and Natural Resources Division, Washington, D.C., for the defendant-appellee., James P. Walsh, Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for defendant-intervenor-appellee American Forest Resource Council.