No. 18-1264

Ronald Clark Fleshman, Jr. v. Volkswagen, AG, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-04-02
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: administrative-law citizen-suit class-action-settlement clean-air-act defeat-devices emissions-standards epa epa-regulation state-implementation-plans statutory-interpretation vehicle-emissions vehicle-importation
Key Terms:
Environmental Arbitration SocialSecurity Privacy ClassAction JusticiabilityDoctri Jurisdiction
Latest Conference: 2019-05-23
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can the EPA revise Clean Air Act to allow defeat devices,can EPA revise state plans to allow defeat devices,can a citizen intervene when EPA refuses to enforce Clean Air Act,was it an abuse of discretion to approve class action settlement allowing illegal vehicles

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Can the Environmental Protection Agency revise clear statutory terms of the Clean Air Act to allow the importation, sale, and use of motor vehicles with “defeat devices” when Congress expressly prohibited the same in enacting section 203 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7522? 2. Can the Environmental Protection Agency revise clear statutory terms of the State Implementation Plans of seventeen States to allow the use of motor vehicles with “defeat devices?” 3. Cana citizen intervene under 42 U.S.C. § 7604 or Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 when the Environmental Protection Agency refuses to enforce the Clean Air Act and the emissions standards and limitations found in 42 U.S.C. § 7522? 4. Was it an abuse of discretion for the District Court, as affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, to approve a class action settlement condoning illegal activity by allowing 487,500 clandestinely imported vehicles to remain in the United States in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a)(1) and (b)(2), 19 U.S.C. § 1595a (c)(1)(A), and to remain in use in violation of the Clean Air Act and the State Implementation Plans of 17 States? ii LIST OF ALL

Docket Entries

2019-05-28
Petition DENIED. Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2019-05-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-04-11
Waiver of right of respondents Jason Hill, et al. to respond filed.
2019-04-09
Waiver of right of respondents Volkswagen AG; AUDI AG; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; Volkswagen Group of America Chattanooga Operations, LLC to respond filed.
2019-03-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 2, 2019)
2019-01-23
Application (18A759) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until March 28, 2019.
2019-01-18
Application (18A759) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 27, 2019 to March 28, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Jason Hill, et al.
Elizabeth J. CabraserLieff, Cabraser, et al., Respondent
Ronald Fleshman, et al.
Elwood Earl Sanders Jr.Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Volkswagen AG; AUDI AG; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; Volkswagen Group of America Chattanooga Operations, LLC
Sharon L. NellesSullivan and Cromwell, Respondent