Court of Appeals Denies R-CALF

frenchie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
2,490
City & State/Province
nw manitoba
CCA: Court of Appeals Denies R-CALF Request For Rehearing
cattlenetwork.com

On October 13th the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied both R-CALF’s request for a re-hearing and their request for a rehearing en banc of that court’s decision to overturn the preliminary injunction against Canadian live cattle imports. It was the overturning of the preliminary injunction that allowed Canadian under 30 month feeder and slaughter cattle to begin moving to the U.S. in July.

The panel of three judges that issued the decision overturning the preliminary injunction denied R-CALF’s request for a rehearing. In addition, no active judge in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asked for a vote on R-CALF’s request for a rehearing en banc. Had any one of the 47 active judges requested it, a vote of all the active judges would have decided if a rehearing in front of a larger panel of judges would have been heard.

“This effectively ends the appeals process for the overturning of the preliminary injunction in the Court of Appeals. If R-CALF wants to continue its efforts to reverse the overturning of the preliminary injunction, they would now have to appeal it to the Supreme Court,” says Stan Eby, President of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association. “We sincerely hope that R-CALF will cease its unwarranted and wasteful court actions and recognize that science will prevail. We also hope the R-CALF members will begin to understand that the Canadian industry is not a threat to their livelihood and that two-way trade benefits everyone.”

Judge Cebull of the U.S. District Court, Montana Division, has yet to issue his decision whether or not additional hearings will be heard in his court prior to his ruling on R-CALF’s request for a permanent injunction against Canadian live cattle and beef.
 
Case Will Go Forward,

Despite 9th Circuit’s Decision to Deny Rehearing Request



(Billings, Mont.) – The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday issued an order denying R-CALF USA’s petition for a rehearing in the organization’s efforts to force the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to withdraw its BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) Minimal-Risk Regions rule (Final Rule), which re-established trade with Canada for live cattle under 30 months of age and additional beef products. USDA’s Final Rule weakened the health and safety regulations regarding the importation of certain ruminants, ruminant products and byproducts that pose a risk of introducing additional cases of BSE into the United States.



The following statement should be attributed to R-CALF USA President and Co-Founder Leo McDonnell:



“Obviously, we are disappointed in the 9th Circuit’s decision. However, this is merely a decision regarding a preliminary injunction that maintained the ban on Canadian imports while our challenge to the Final Rule is pending, and that challenge is still before the District Court (U.S. District Court for the District of Montana).



“We remain confident that USDA’s Final Rule is premature. We will now ask the District Court to schedule a hearing in our case, at which time the court will have a full opportunity to consider all of the facts that demonstrate why USDA’s actions concerning Canadian imports are ill-conceived.



“Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle.”
 
Oldtimer":3o2s7irn said:
“Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle.”

The same risks that exist within the native U.S cattle herd.
 
frenchie":21kxshyu said:
Oldtimer":21kxshyu said:
“Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle.”

The same risks that exist within the native U.S cattle herd.

Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

Canada 4 origin positives and 1/20th the cattle to US's 1 origin positive....Plus one of Canada's was a POST feedban born....

Should go to trial and bring out all the info and settle the question once and for all......
 
Oldtimer":3nxqg9an said:
frenchie":3nxqg9an said:
Oldtimer":3nxqg9an said:
“Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle.”

The same risks that exist within the native U.S cattle herd.

Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

Canada 4 origin positives and 1/20th the cattle to US's 1 origin positive....Plus one of Canada's was a POST feedban born....

Should go to trial and bring out all the info and settle the question once and for all......


OT .. nice try..The fact of the matter is the U.S testing program has been shown to have serious flaws within it..So much so that it was shown that a positive American cow slipped through the testing procedure...how many others ?

Or maybe you like to talk about the 500 plus animals that were downers that were somehow not tested?Quite a testing program.

It does not matter the cows age...it just shows there was B.s.e infectious material in Texas over a decade ago. Since that time how many more cows were exposed in Texas?

Then there was the 1200 companies the F.d.a found In 2003 in violation of the ruminant feed ban Regulations.

good luck OT
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
I bet befor you two die ya'll kiss. Sure enough. Fench style for Frenchie for sure. :oops: :shock:


Scotty
 
frenchie":1b943fcd said:
Oldtimer":1b943fcd said:
frenchie":1b943fcd said:
Oldtimer":1b943fcd said:
“Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle.”

The same risks that exist within the native U.S cattle herd.

Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

Canada 4 origin positives and 1/20th the cattle to US's 1 origin positive....Plus one of Canada's was a POST feedban born....

Should go to trial and bring out all the info and settle the question once and for all......


OT .. nice try..The fact of the matter is the U.S testing program has been shown to have serious flaws within it..So much so that it was shown that a positive American cow slipped through the testing procedure...how many others ?

Or maybe you like to talk about the 500 plus animals that were downers that were somehow not tested?Quite a testing program.

It does not matter the cows age...it just shows there was B.s.e infectious material in Texas over a decade ago. Since that time how many more cows were exposed in Texas?

Then there was the 1200 companies the F.d.a found In 2003 in violation of the ruminant feed ban Regulations.

good luck OT

frenchie-You have helped prove my point-- That and your post about FDA failing to implement the additional BSE feedban safeguards......Until the FDA puts those safeguards into place we should not be importing beef or cattle from a country with a higher potential BSE risk and further endangering the health and safety of our US cattle herd......

The new proposal would still allow animals to be fed material that some scientists consider potentially infectious, including the brains and spinal cords of young animals; the eyes, tonsils, intestines and nerves of old animals; chicken food and chicken dung swept up from the floors of poultry farms; scrapings from restaurant plates; and calf milk made from cow blood and fat.

The banning of these materials must be necessary and scientifically justified as CFIA banned them in Canada- but in the US with our government presently being controlled by Big Business-- bucks override science....

Cattlemen should be fighting against importation of beef and cattle from higher risk BSE countries until we get all these firewalls and safeguards put in place- for the safety and future of the US cattle herd...
 
Oldtimer":pnf4iupq said:
frenchie":pnf4iupq said:
Oldtimer":pnf4iupq said:
frenchie":pnf4iupq said:
Oldtimer":pnf4iupq said:
“Hopefully, we will prevail in our efforts to protect the U.S. cattle industry and U.S. consumers from the unnecessary and avoidable disease risks associated with Canadian cattle.”

The same risks that exist within the native U.S cattle herd.

Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

Canada 4 origin positives and 1/20th the cattle to US's 1 origin positive....Plus one of Canada's was a POST feedban born....

Should go to trial and bring out all the info and settle the question once and for all......


OT .. nice try..The fact of the matter is the U.S testing program has been shown to have serious flaws within it..So much so that it was shown that a positive American cow slipped through the testing procedure...how many others ?

Or maybe you like to talk about the 500 plus animals that were downers that were somehow not tested?Quite a testing program.

It does not matter the cows age...it just shows there was B.s.e infectious material in Texas over a decade ago. Since that time how many more cows were exposed in Texas?

Then there was the 1200 companies the F.d.a found In 2003 in violation of the ruminant feed ban Regulations.

good luck OT

frenchie-You have helped prove my point-- That and your post about FDA failing to implement the additional BSE feedban safeguards......Until the FDA puts those safeguards into place we should not be importing beef or cattle from a country with a higher potential BSE risk and further endangering the health and safety of our US cattle herd......

Higher risk as compared to what.... your testing system.The one that misses positive cows.At least we use a test that works..



Oldtimer":pnf4iupq said:

The banning of these materials must be necessary and scientifically justified as CFIA banned them in Canada- but in the US

Thats sayes it all Ot..thanks .Whos got the stronger safequards.That makes us more of a risk how?.
 
Oldtimer":g3u771up said:
frenchie":g3u771up said:
Oldtimer":g3u771up said:
frenchie":g3u771up said:
Oldtimer":g3u771up said:
Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

.....

Lets have some names OT...

Frenchie- They are listed on the witness list of the court files.

So list them ....I don,t access to the files..you do.

Heres the link:
http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/bse_fmd.htm

I asked for names not a link I can,t acess
 
Oldtimer":1ej0ere4 said:
frenchie":1ej0ere4 said:
Oldtimer":1ej0ere4 said:
frenchie":1ej0ere4 said:
Oldtimer":1ej0ere4 said:
Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

.....

Lets have some names OT...

Frenchie- They are listed on the witness list of the court files.

So list them ....I don,t access to the files..you do.

Heres the link:
http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/bse_fmd.htm

Works fine for me--Maybe they have a blocker for Canadian IP addresses :lol:
 
Oldtimer":2ewri10i said:
Oldtimer":2ewri10i said:
frenchie":2ewri10i said:
Oldtimer":2ewri10i said:
frenchie":2ewri10i said:
Oldtimer":2ewri10i said:
Not according to the statisticians and many scientists...

.....

Lets have some names OT...

Frenchie- They are listed on the witness list of the court files.

So list them ....I don,t access to the files..you do.

Heres the link:
http://www.r-calfusa.com/BSE/bse_fmd.htm

Works fine for me--Maybe they have a blocker for Canadian IP addresses :lol:

I quess they have something to hide eh.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top