Devia v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Empirical Analysis
492 F.3d 421 · 2007
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 18 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Larsen v. Navy (2008), Cohen v. United States (2011)
11 federal appellate · 18 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2401
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Thomas v. Union Carbide Agricultural Products Co. · Toilet Goods Association v. Wga Rdner · Texas v. United States · National Park Hospitality Association v. Department of the Interior
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Even though the legal issues may be clear, a case may still not be fit for review: [T]he question of fitness does not pivot solely on whether a court is capable of resolving a claim intelligently, but also involves an assessment - of whether it is appropriate for a the court to undertake the task. Federal courts cannot — and should not — spend then-scarce resources on what amounts to shadow boxing. Thus, if a plaintiffs claim, though predominantly legal in character, depends on future events that may never come to pass, or that may not occur in the form forecasted, then the claim is unripe.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'to prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature adjudication, from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements over administrative policies.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The ripeness doctrine is 'drawn both from Article III limitations on judicial power and from prudential reasons for refusing to exercise jurisdiction.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.