UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

Similar documents
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2011 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 19, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2014 Page 1 of 1

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 07/25/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Nos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. COOPER TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent, v.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JEFFREY ALEXANDER STERLING, and JAMES RISEN,

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner v. CHANBOND, LLC Patent Owner

ORU l;~]i ^i^totestodhhfw^

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Case 1:13-cv KBJ Document 46 Filed 03/20/17 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 27, No and Consolidated Cases

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 9, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APP: AJllS--~---- PETITION FOR REVIEW. and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15( a), the Mozilla Corporation

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:16-cv NDF Document 29 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 9

Case 1:10-cv EGS Document 44 Filed 03/15/12 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

In the Supreme Court of the United States

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

No ORAL ARGUMENT HELD JUNE 1, 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 07/19/2011 Page 1 of 8 [NOT SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] No

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ReCEIVED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU CLERK

[ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 15, 2010] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

PETITION FOR REVIEW. Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Circuit

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION OF AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 85 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD ON APRIL 15, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Defendants-Appellees.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No (1:15-cv GBL-MSN)

PETITION FOR REVIEW. Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 402(a), 28 U.S.C. 2342(1) and 2344, and Federal

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case , Document 1-1, 04/21/2017, , Page1 of 2

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED: OCTOBER 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

18 105G. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT Oi, FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMB &!IPANIC MEDIA COALITION, Petitioner CASE NO. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

CLERK RECEIVED. JTW OR UiSThICT ØF OL tikbta. FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRC1 lit ETSY, INC., Petitioner

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 15, 2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 97 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

No (and consolidated cases) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:16-cv SWS Document 218 Filed 04/06/18 Page 1 of 4

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

NO In the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit SHARON M. HELMAN, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Case 1:14-cv N/A Document 6 Filed 08/26/14 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. SIERRA CLUB; and VIRGINIA WILDERNESS COMMITTEE,

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR MAY 8, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 4:16-cv ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 2, No (and consolidated cases) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 10/23/2015. DISTRICT OF COWMBAaijh 1

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

FOR DISTRIGT OF COLUMBIA 9fHE UNITED STATES COURT OF URAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION; BASIN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE; EAST

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO TRANSFER AND HOLD CASES IN ABEYANCE

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 2:16-cv SWS Document 129 Filed 06/20/17 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DOTCONNECTAFRICA TRUST,

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ) Grid Resiliency Pricing Rule ) RM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. Grid Reliability and Resilience Pricing ) RM

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED Nos (L), (con.), (con.), (con.)

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. v. Funambol, Inc. Doc. 52

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 10/23/2015 Page 1 of Constitution Avenue,

Nos , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT. PARKERVISION, INC., a Florida corporation,

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C.

Transcription:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT AIRBORN, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. U.S. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION and Civ. No. 17-1124 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents, and UNITED STEELWORKERS, Intervenor. UNOPPOSED JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 27, Petitioners AirBorn, Inc., Associated Builders and Contractors, Century Aluminum Company, Edison Electric Institute, Harsco Corporation, Marine Specialty Painting, Inc., Mason Contractors Association of America, Materion Brush, Inc., Mead Metals, Inc., Mobile Abrasives, Inc., National Association of Home Builders of the United States, and National Association of Manufacturers (collectively Petitioners, and Respondents U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration ( OSHA or Agency and Department of Labor 1 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432

( DoL (collectively Respondents, 1 jointly move this Court to further extend the dates for the filing of Petitioners briefs set forth in the Clerk s Order (May 3, 2017 by 30 days, and for the filing of Respondents brief by 37 days. The Clerk s Order granted an initial joint motion to extend the briefing schedule filed by Petitioners and Respondents on May 2, 2017, that requested an additional 45 days. OSHA filed a certified list of the record on June 20, 2017. The parties seek an extension of the briefing schedule so that they may continue on-going discussions regarding a potential resolution of concerns that have been identified with the rule under review, and to provide time for the newly confirmed Secretary of Labor to consider the matter before him. In addition, OSHA has submitted to the Office of the Federal Register ( OFR, and is expected to issue within the next week, a proposed rule relating to the final standard under review in this case. In further support of this motion, the parties state as follows: 1. Petitioners are challenging DoL s and OSHA s final rule Occupational Exposure to Beryllium (82 Fed. Reg. 2470; Jan. 9, 2017. The effective date of the standard was May 20, 2017 (see 82 Fed. Reg. 14439; Mar. 21, 2017 and there are compliance dates for various regulatory obligations of March 12, 2018, March 11, 2019, and March 10, 2020. 2. On May 2, 2017, Petitioners submitted to OSHA a Petition for Administrative Stay and for Re-Opening of the Rulemaking Record ( Petition. The Petition requested that the Agency: (i stay the final rule s effective date 1 Intervenor United Steelworkers ( USW has represented to counsel for Petitioners that it has no objection to the 30-day extension. 2 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 705 and 29 U.S.C. 655(b of the Occupational Safety and Health Act ( OSH Act ; and (ii re-open the rulemaking record to allow further comment on various aspects of the standard. OSHA has yet to formally respond to the Petition, and the rule is now in effect. 3. Certain Petitioners and OSHA staff are currently discussing a potential resolution of concerns that have been expressed about specific provisions of the final rule. This includes clarifications of various provisions and related Agency interpretations, as well as technical amendments, and OSHA s consideration of whether it will need to weigh more substantive changes to the standard as presently written. To the extent that the parties have additional time to resolve these issues before the briefing schedule imposes deadlines on the parties, the universe of issues potentially subject to litigation will be reduced, as will the number of issues that must be briefed and considered by the Court. In addition, OSHA recently submitted to the OFR a proposed rule relating to the standard under review here. That proposed rule may address some of the issues that Petitioners otherwise intend to raise in this litigation. 4. The current date of July 10, 2017 for submission of the Petitioners briefs also does not allow OSHA, and in particular the current administration s new appointees, adequate time to consider the complex issues affecting the final rule. The Secretary of Labor, Alexander Acosta, was only confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 27, 2017, and the Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA has yet to be nominated. The requested 30-day extension in the briefing schedule will allow new 3 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432

leadership additional time to attempt to review the matter without expending resources unnecessarily. Specifically, the parties propose that that Petitioners briefs be due on August 9, 2017. The parties further propose that Respondents brief be due 37 days later, on September 15, 2017, due to Respondents counsel s previously-scheduled travel from August 25, 2017 to August 31, 2017. 5. The parties believe that an extension of the briefing schedule dates will conserve resources of the parties and the Court, and allow the parties to avoid litigation and focus on an administrative resolution to outstanding matters. Dated: June 23, 2017 Respectfully submitted, Petitioners /s/ David G. Sarvadi Materion Brush Inc. David G. Sarvadi Keller and Heckman LLP 1001 G Street, N.W. Suite 500 West (202 434-4301 /s/ David G. Sarvadi AirBorn Inc. David G. Sarvadi Keller and Heckman LLP 1001 G Street, N.W. Suite 500 West (202 434-4301 /s/ Bradford T. Hammock Associated Builders and Contractors Bradford T. Hammock Jackson Lewis P.C. 10701 Parkridge Boulevard Suite 300 Reston, VA 20191 (703 483-8316 /s/ Bradford T. Hammock Mason Contractors Ass n of America Bradford T. Hammock Jackson Lewis P.C. 10701 Parkridge Boulevard Suite 300 Reston, VA 20191 (703 483-8316 4 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 4 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432

/s/ David G. Sarvadi Mead Metals Inc. David G. Sarvadi Keller and Heckman LLP 1001 G Street, N.W. Suite 500 West (202 434-4301 /s/ Eugene Scalia Century Aluminum Company Eugene Scalia Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202 955-8206 /s/ Melissa Anne Bailey Edison Electric Institute Melissa Anne Bailey John F. Martin Ogletree Deakins 1909 K Street N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202 263-0267 /s/ Samuel Romaninsky Harsco Corp. Samuel Romaninsky 350 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717 763-7064 /s/ Bradford T. Hammock National Ass n of Home Builders Bradford T. Hammock Jackson Lewis P.C. 10701 Parkridge Boulevard Suite 300 Reston, VA 20191 (703 483-8316 /s/ Jeffrey M. Tanenbaum Marine Specialty Painting Inc. Jeffrey M. Tanenbaum Nixon Peabody One Embarcadero Center Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415 984-8450 /s/ Jeffrey M. Tanenbaum Mobile Abrasives Inc. Jeffrey M. Tanenbaum Nixon Peabody One Embarcadero Center Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415 984-8450 /s/ Quentin Riegel National Ass n of Manufacturers Quentin Riegel 733 10 th Street, N.W. Suite 700 (202 637-3000 5 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 5 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432

Respondents /s/ Radha Vishnuvajjala RADHA VISHNUVAJJALA Attorney U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Ave., NW, Rm. S-4004 Washington, D.C. 20210 (202 693-5790 Counsel for DoL and OSHA 6 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 6 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 23, 2017, the foregoing document was filed with the Clerk of the Court via CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on counsel of record via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF and through regular U.S. mail to the following counsel who do not appear in the CM/ECF system (Samuel Romaninsky, Harsco Corp, 350 Poplar Church Road, Camp Hill, PA 17011. /s/ Timothy C. Sansone Timothy C. Sansone 4833-7380-4362, v. 1 7 Appellate Case: 17-1124 Page: 7 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Entry ID: 4550432