885 F.2d 875
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
William K. REILLY,* Administrator, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.
and
Idaho Mining Association, et al., Defendant-Intervenors.
SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
William K. REILLY,* Administrator, and
the Environmental Protection Agency, et al., Defendants,
and
Idaho Mining Association, Defendant-Intervenor/Appellant.
Nos. 84-2719, 84-2845 and 85-1523.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted July 12, 1985.
Submission vacated Sept. 30, 1985.
Resubmitted Aug. 31, 1989.
Decided Aug. 31, 1989.
Before FERGUSON, WILLIAM A. NORRIS and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Upon due consideration of the joint statement of the parties filed August 7, 1989, the separate statement of plaintiff received August 14, 1989, and the supplemental statement of the defendants set forth in their motion received August 15, 1989 for leave to file the statement, it is ordered as follows:
1. The cases are resubmitted for decision.
2. The motion of the defendants received August 15, 1989 for leave to file a supplemental statement is granted. The Clerk will file the statement.
3. Two cases, Nos. 84-2719 and 84-2845, are dismissed as being moot.
4. The motion of the defendants that the orders of the district court dated September 17, 1984 in case No. 84-2719, and December 11, 1984 in case No. 84-2845, be vacated is denied.
5. On remand the district court may consider whether its two orders should or should not be vacated.
6. Although the cases on the merits are now moot, the court has jurisdiction to determine a request for an award of attorney fees to the plaintiff prior the cases becoming moot. The plaintiff is awarded its attorney fees for appeals in Nos. 84-2719 and 84-2845. The cases are remanded to the district court for determination of the amount of such fees.
7. The appeal in case No. 85-1523 is deconsolidated from the appeals and is dismissed.
Substituted for former Administrator Lee M. Thomas, Fed.R.App.P. 43(c)(1)