Summary
finding § 825p provides a basis for federal court jurisdiction when federal question jurisdiction under § 1331 may be absent
Summary of this case from Ne. Rural Elec. Membership Corp. v. Wabash Valley Power Ass'n, Inc.Opinion
Nos. 02-16619, 02-16625, 02-16629, 03-15588.
Argued August 12, 2003. Submitted as to all parties except NRG Energy, Inc. October 27, 2003. Submitted as to NRG Energy, Inc. April 15, 2004.
The court had deferred submission pending receipt of a bankruptcy court order granting limited relief from the automatic stay in the proceedings of Mirant Corporation and its affiliated debtors.
At the time of submission as to the other parties, the appeal was not submitted as NRG Energy, Inc. ("NRG"), which was in bankruptcy proceedings, and whose appeal had accordingly been stayed by this court's order of May 30, 2003. The court vacated its stay on April 15, 2004, and, consistent with the parties' stipulation, deemed the case submitted as to NRG.
Filed July 6, 2004. Amended October 29, 2004.
Tamar Pachter, Deputy Attorney General, State of California, San Francisco, CA, argued the case for the appellant and was on the briefs. Attorney General Bill Lockyer, and Thomas Greene, Damon Connolly, Danette Valdez, Pamela Merchant, Paul Stein, and Laura Zuckerman, Office of the Attorney General, were also on the briefs.
Terry J. Houlihan, Bingham McCutcheon LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued the case for the appellees and was on the joint briefs of the appellees, as attorney for appellees Reliant Energy, Inc.; Reliant Energy Services, Inc.; Reliant Energy Power Generation, Inc.; Reliant Resources, Inc.; Reliant Energy Coolwater, Inc.; Reliant Energy Ellwood, Inc.; Reliant Energy Etiwanda, Inc.; Reliant Energy Mandalay, Inc.; and Reliant Energy Ormond Beach, Inc. Nora Cregan and Thomas S. Hixson were also on the joint briefs as attorneys for the same parties.
John M. Grenfell, Douglas R. Tribble, and Michael J. Kass, Pillsbury Winthrop LLP, San Francisco, CA, were on the joint briefs of the appellees, as attorneys for appellees Dynegy, Inc.; Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc.; West Coast Power, LLC; Cabrillo Power I, LLC; Cabrillo Power II, LLC; El Segundo Power, LLC; and Long Beach Generation, LLC.
John A. Sturgeon and Bryan A. Merryman, White Case LLP, Los Angeles, CA, were on the joint briefs of the appellees, as attorneys for appellees Mirant Corporation; Mirant California, LLC; Mirant Delta, LLC; Mirant Potrero, LLC; Mirant Americas Energy Marketing, LP; Mirant California Investments, Inc.; Mirant Americas, Inc.; and Southern Energy Gold States Holdings, Inc.
David T. Peterson and Theodore G. Spanos, Morgan Lewis Brockius LLP, Los Angeles, CA, were on the joint briefs of the appellees, as attorneys for appellee Xcel Energy, Inc.
Carlton A. Varner and Timothy B. Taylor, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter Hampton LLP, Los Angeles, CA, were on the joint briefs of the appellees, as attorneys for appellee NRG Energy, Inc.
Attorney General Christine O. Gregoire, Seattle, Washington, and Tina E. Kondo and W. Stuart Hirschfeld, Office of the Attorney General; and Attorney General Hardy Myers, Salem, Oregon, and Robert T. Roth and Colin A. Yost, Office of the Attorney General; were on the brief of amici curiae State of Washington and State of Oregon in support of plaintiff.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Vaughn R. Walker, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. Nos. CV-02-01854-VRW, CV-02-01791-VRW, CV-02-01914-VRW, CV-02-01791-VRW, CV-02-01914-VRW, CV-02-01854-VRW.
Before HALL, O'SCANNLAIN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
The opinion filed July 6, 2004 is hereby amended as follows:
At page 8863 of the slip opinion, footnote 17, delete the parenthetical quotation and add the following two sentences at the conclusion of footnote 17 as follows:
At issue are not state regulatory schemes for employment discrimination, workers compensation, or the like, which might indirectly and unintentionally have some possible effect on energy prices. Rather, the lawsuit seeks directly to enforce federal tariff obligations.
With this amendment, the panel has voted unanimously to deny appellant's petition for rehearing. Judge O'Scannlain has voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. Judges Hall and Leavy recommend that the petition for rehearing en banc be denied.
The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the mater en banc. Fed.R.App.P. 35.
The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.