Cluster 787863
green
· 40 citation events
across 8 courts.
Showing the 10 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
P’ship v. United States, 384 F.3d 721 , 728 (9th Cir. 2004) (“[A] reviewing court must 20 determine whether an agency’s decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and 21 whether there has been a clear error of judgment.”).
“[A] reviewing court must 20 determine whether an agency’s decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and 21 whether there has been a clear error of judgment.”
green
US Citrus Sci. Council v. U.S. Dep't of Agric. (2018)
Helens , 384 F.3d at 728 (citation omitted).
citation omitted
Helens, 384 F.3d at 728 (citation omitted).
citation omitted
green
Geo-Energy Partners-1983 Ltd. v. Salazar (2010)
P’ship v. United States, 384 F.3d 721, 728 (9th Cir.2004).
green
Debry v. Department of Homeland Security (2009)
P’ship v. U.S., 384 F.3d 721, 727 (9th Cir.2004) (citations omitted).
green
Chung Hak Hong v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security Citizenship & Immigration Services (2009)
Partnership v. United States, 384 F.3d 721, 727 (9th Cir.2004).
green
Defenders of Wildlife v. Tuggle (2009)
“So, in considering whether FWS has fulfilled any duties arising from its determination, we must look to the determination FWS actually made.” Id. at 811.
Partnership v. United States, 384 F.3d 721, 727 (9th Cir.2004); Spencer Enters., Inc., 345 F.3d at 693 (9th Cir.2003).
green
GEO-ENERGY PARTNERS-1983 LTD. v. Kempthorne (2008)
P’ship v. U.S., 384 F.3d 721, 727 (9th Cir.2004)(holding that it is “well established that once an agency has taken final agency action under the APA, a reviewing court analyzes that decision under the arbitrary and capricious standard of review”).