The D.C. Circuit published three opinions during the week of March 9, none of which broke new ground. 

In Clean Fuels Alliance America v. EPA, Judge Garcia wrote for a unanimous panel in holding that a challenge to EPA’s Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program was moot. Its holding was “narrow” and rested on circuit precedent:

Petitioners ask us to opine on the propriety of a supposed agency “policy” disconnected from any particular agency action, when the operative statutory provisions have changed mid-litigation in ways that bear directly on the legal question petitioners raised, and when it is not clear the agency even adheres to the same policy petitioners initially challenged. None of the authorities they have identified involved remotely analogous circumstances. We accordingly conclude that the default mootness rule for superseded agency action governs.

The remaining opinions also decided narrow questions. In Mitchell v. Phelan, Judge Walker wrote for a unanimous panel that held that the Navy had reasonably explained why it disciplined an officer for leaving his post to move his car without telling his commanding officer. And in Rose v. Kennedy, Judge Pan wrote for a unanimous panel that held that a district court’s remand order was not an appealable “final decision” under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Citing circuit precedent, the Court held that the order was “in the heartland of non-final judgments” because it was a remand order to a federal agency, which left “the agency with more work to do.”