BRRAM, Inc. v. United States Federal Aviation Administration, 110916 FED3, 15-2393

• Docket Nº: 15-2393
• Opinion Judge: RENDELL, Circuit Judge
• Party Name: BRRAM, INC., a corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; MS. HOLLY BUSSEY; MR. WILLIAM LYNCH; MR. RICHARD DELELLO; MS. JULIE POWER; MR. JOHN GIACOBETTI; MRS. JENNIFER GIACOBETTI; MS. DEBORAH LEAMANN; MS. CAROLINE BONDI; MS. DELORES BRIENZA; MR. RICHARD WAYNE, Appellants v. UNITED STATES FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTR...
• Judge Panel: Before: MCKEE, Chief Judge , HARDIMAN, and RENDELL, Circuit Judges
• Case Date: November 09, 2016
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

BRRAM, INC., a corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; MS. HOLLY BUSSEY; MR. WILLIAM LYNCH; MR. RICHARD DELELLO; MS. JULIE POWER; MR. JOHN GIACOBETTI; MRS. JENNIFER GIACOBETTI; MS. DEBORAH LEAMANN; MS. CAROLINE BONDI; MS. DELORES BRIENZA; MR. RICHARD WAYNE, Appellants

v.

UNITED STATES FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA); MERCER COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS; FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.

No. 15-2393

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

November 9, 2016

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on September 22, 2016

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (District Case No. 3-14-cv-02686) District Judge: Honorable Peter G. Sheridan

Before: MCKEE, Chief Judge ^[*] , HARDIMAN, and RENDELL, Circuit Judges

OPINION ^[*]

RENDELL, Circuit Judge

In this appeal, BRRAM argues that the District Court erred by ruling that the FAA's September 25, 2012 order (which amended Frontier Airlines' Operation Specifications and authorized Frontier to provide commercial passenger service in and out of Trenton-Mercer Airport) was properly appealable only to the Court of Appeals, and not to the District Court. The District Court's dismissal of BRAMM's complaint is before us, as is the District Court's denial of BRRAM's motion to amend "to clarify that plaintiffs were not contesting the validity of the Ops Specs amendment itself, but the failure and refusal of the FAA to perform any environmental or safety analysis pursuant to NEPA of the effects of Frontier Airlines['] expansion of flights . . . ." Reply Br. at 14.

As the parties are familiar with the facts and the procedural posture to date, we need not recount them. Title 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a) provides in part: [A] person disclosing a substantial interest in an order issued by the . . . Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration with respect to aviation duties and powers designated to be carried out by the Administrator . . . may apply for review of the order by filing a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or in the court of appeals of the United States for the circuit in which the person resides or has its principal place of business.

49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). Under subsection (c), the jurisdiction of the Courts of Appeals is "exclusive." Id. at §46110(c). The District Court...