Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
BP Oil Spill Settlement: BP's Emergency Motion for an Injunction (November 21, 2013)

BP Oil Spill Settlement: BP's Emergency Motion for an Injunction (November 21, 2013)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 37|Likes:
Published by TheDonovanLawGroup
BP requests the Fifth Circuit to enforce its October 2 judgment by entering an injunction
that implements the BP oil spill settlement agreement’s threshold causal-nexus requirement. BP alleges "thousands of claimants are not proper class members because their alleged injuries are not traceable to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill."
BP requests the Fifth Circuit to enforce its October 2 judgment by entering an injunction
that implements the BP oil spill settlement agreement’s threshold causal-nexus requirement. BP alleges "thousands of claimants are not proper class members because their alleged injuries are not traceable to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill."

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: TheDonovanLawGroup on Dec 06, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/01/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
No. 13-30315 (consolidated with No. 13-30329) _________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________________ IN RE: DEEPWATER HORIZON _________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana MDL No. 2179, Civ. A. No. 12-970 _________________________
EMERGENCY MOTION OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS TO ENFORCE THIS COURT’S OCTOBER 2 JUDGMENT  AND FOR AN INJUNCTION
_________________________ Richard C. Godfrey, P.C. J. Andrew Langan, P.C. Wendy L. Bloom  Andrew B. Bloomer, P.C. R. Chris Heck
IRKLAND
&
 
E
LLIS
LLP 300 North LaSalle Street Chicago, IL 60654 (312) 862-2000 Theodore B. Olson
Counsel of Record
Miguel A. Estrada Thomas G. Hungar Scott P. Martin G
IBSON
,
 
D
UNN
&
 
C
RUTCHER
LLP 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 955-8500
Counsel for Appellants
 [
additional counsel listed on next page
]
Case: 13-30315 Document: 00512449474 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/21/2013
 
Jeffrey Bossert Clark Steven A. Myers
IRKLAND
&
 
E
LLIS
LLP 655 Fifteenth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 879-5000 Daniel A. Cantor  Andrew T. Karron  A 
RNOLD
&
 
P
ORTER
LLP 555 Twelfth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 942-5000 Jeffrey Lennard D
ENTONS
LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 7800 Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876-8000 George H. Brown G
IBSON
,
 
D
UNN
&
 
C
RUTCHER
LLP 1881 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304 (650) 849-5300 S. Gene FendlerDon K. Haycraft R. Keith Jarrett L
ISKOW
&
 
L
EWIS
 701 Poydras Street, Suite 5000 New Orleans, LA 70139 (504) 581-7979 Kevin M. Downey F. Lane Heard III W
ILLIAMS
&
 
C
ONNOLLY
LLP 725 Twelfth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 434-5000
Case: 13-30315 Document: 00512449474 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/21/2013
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
i INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1
 
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ................................. 4
 
LEGAL STANDARD ................................................................................. 9
 
 ARGUMENT .............................................................................................. 9
 
I.
 
BP Is Likely To Succeed On The Merits. ............................. 10
 
 A.
 
The Settlement Agreement Limits Class Membership To Claimants Whose Losses Were Caused By The Spill. ................................................... 11
 
B.
 
Refusal To Apply the Causal-Nexus Requirement Would Undermine Class Certification. ....................... 16
 
1.
 
 Adequacy Would Be Defeated. ........................... 17
 
2.
 
The Class Notice Would Be Rendered Defective. ............................................................. 21
 
3.
 
Commonality, Predominance, And Typicality Would Be Defeated. ........................... 23
 
4.
 
Fairness Would Be Destroyed. ........................... 29
 
5.
 
Class Membership Would Be Rendered Non-Ascertainable. ............................................. 30
 
6.
 
Class Members Would Lack Article III Standing. ............................................................. 31
 
C.
 
The “Causation” Criteria of Exhibit 4B Do Not Establish Class Membership. ...................................... 33
 
D.
 
This Court Should Grant BP The Relief It Seeks Now. .............................................................................. 40
 
II.
 
BP Will Be Irreparably Harmed Absent An Injunction. ..... 42
 
III.
 
The Threatened Permanent Injury To BP Outweighs  Any Alleged Harm To BEL Claimants. ................................ 46
 
IV.
 
 An Injunction Will Promote The Public Interest. ................ 48
 
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ 49
 
Case: 13-30315 Document: 00512449474 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/21/2013

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->