Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
US TECH. CORP. v. JOHNSON, 361 Fed.Appx. 629 (6th Cir. 2010)
US Tech. Corp., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Stephen L. JOHNSON,In his Off. capacity as Adm’r, Adm’x, U.S. Env’t ProtectionAgency; Chris Korleski, In his capacity as Dir., Ohio EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Defendants-Appellees., 361 F. App'x 629 (6th Cir. 2010)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 2010-01-08
- Topic
- general
US TECH. CORP. v. JOHNSON, 361 Fed.Appx. 629 (6th Cir. 2010) US TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Stephen L. JOHNSON,In his official capacity as Administrator, U.S.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed US TECH. CORP. v. JOHNSON, 361 Fed.Appx. 629 (6th Cir. 2010). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
US TECH. CORP. v. JOHNSON,361 Fed.Appx. 629(6th Cir. 2010)
US TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Stephen L. JOHNSON,
In his official capacity as Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency; Chris Korleski, In his capacity as Director, Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-3224.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
January 8, 2010.
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
Before: MARTIN, BOGGS, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.
In this appeal, United States Technology Corporation appeals the district court's dismissal of its request for injunctive and declaratory relief. Having reviewed the briefs and records in this case, we concur with the district court's well-reasoned opinion andAFFIRMits judgment.US TechnologyCorp. v. Stephen L. Johnson, et al., No. 2:08-CV-82,2009 WL 86745(S.D.Ohio Jan. 13, 2009).
- [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ↩