Renewable Fuels Association v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________
RENEWABLE FUELS ASSOCIATION;
AMERICAN COALITION FOR
ETHANOL; NATIONAL CORN
GROWERS ASSOCIATION; NATIONAL
FARMERS UNION,
Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent,
and
HOLLYFRONTIER CHEYENNE
REFINING, LLC; HOLLYFRONTIER
REFINING AND MARKETING, LLC;
HOLLYFRONTIER WOODS CROSS
REFINING, LLC; WYNNEWOOD
REFINING COMPANY, LLC,
Intervenors - Respondents.
------------------------------
AMERICAN FUEL &
PETROCHEMICAL
MANUFACTURERS; STATE OF
WYOMING; SINCLAIR WYOMING
REFINING COMPANY; SINCLAIR
CASPER REFINING COMPANY; BIG
WEST OIL, LLC; COUNTRYMARK
REFINING AND LOGISTICS, LLC;
ALON REFINING KROTZ SPRINGS,
INC.; ALON USA, LP; AMERICAN
No. 18-9533
(EPA No. 1-3876)
(Environmental Protection Administration)
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
July 29, 2021
Christopher M. Wolpert
Clerk of Court
Appellate Case: 18-9533 Document: 010110555246 Date Filed: 07/29/2021 Page: 1

-- 1 of 2 --

2
REFINING GROUP, INC.; CALUMET
MONTANA REFINING, LLC;
CALUMET SHREVEPORT REFINING,
LLC; DELEK REFINING, LTD.; ERGON
REFINING, INC.; ERGON-WEST
VIRGINIA, INC.; HUNT REFINING
COMPANY; LION OIL COMPANY;
PLACID REFINING COMPANY, LLC;
PAR HAWAII REFINING, LLC; U.S. OIL
& REFINING COMPANY; WYOMING
REFINING COMPANY,
Amici Curiae.
_________________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
_________________________________
Before KELLY, BRISCOE, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
In light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in HollyFrontier
Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Association, 141 S. Ct. 2172 (2021), we
previously recalled our mandate and vacated our judgment in this case. The Clerk
shall issue a new mandate consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision.
Entered for the Court,
Per Curiam
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines
of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for
its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Appellate Case: 18-9533 Document: 010110555246 Date Filed: 07/29/2021 Page: 2

-- 2 of 2 --