145 F. Supp. 3d 113
D.D.C.2015Background
- SSL invested millions to develop and bid for a 480-acre federal land parcel in Henderson, NV, with a direct sale arrangement under SNPLMA.
- BLM initially approved a modified competitive sale process favorable to SSL based on a City-LVNSC development agreement (MPA) promising public benefits and jobs.
- The City terminated the MPA after SSL deposited the final purchase balance, prompting BLM to withdraw the patent and terminate the sale.
- Settlement between SSL and the City altered the project’s viability and restricted SSL’s leadership from Henderson activities; the City withdrew opposition to patent issuance in 2013.
- BLM, under Acting Asst. Sec. Beaudreau, issued a Recommendation Memorandum and ultimately terminated the sale, refunding SSL’s deposits.
- SSL sued under the APA; the court granted Defendants’ summary judgment, upholding BLM’s termination as lawful and supported by the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Secretary had authority to terminate after accepting SSL's offer | Beaudreau lacked authority to terminate the sale. | Secretary has plenary authority to terminate unlawful sales. | Yes; authority exists to terminate when consummation would be unlawful. |
| Whether the termination was arbitrary or capricious | BLM failed to consider relevant factors and the settlement. | Termination was rational and supported by substantial evidence. | No; decision supported by substantial evidence and reasoned explanation. |
| Whether SSL's due process rights were violated by lack of notice/hearing | SSL was deprived of notice and opportunity to respond before withdrawal. | No protected entitlement to patent existed; no deprivation without process. | No due process violation. |
| Whether FLPMA sections constrain the Secretary's power to terminate | Sections 203(g), 208, 204(a) limit authority to terminate. | FLPMA does not strip the Secretary of plenary power to halt unlawful sales. | §203(g), §208, §204(a) do not defeat Secretary's termination authority. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knight v. United States Land Ass'n, 142 U.S. 161 (1891) (Secretary guardian of public lands; can intervene if patent would be annulled)
- Best v. Humboldt Placer Min. Co., 371 U.S. 334 (1963) (Secretary may withhold issuance to ensure validity of land rights)
- Cameron v. United States, 252 U.S. 450 (1920) (Secretary has broad power to determine validity of land claims until title passes)
- Michigan Land & Lumber Co. v. Rust, 168 U.S. 589 (1897) (Department may correct errors before patent passes)
- Ideal Basic Indus., Inc. v. Morton, 542 F.2d 1364 (9th Cir. 1976) (Secretary has continuing jurisdiction over public lands until patent issues)
- Adams v. U.S., 318 F.2d 861 (9th Cir. 1963) (Government authority to determine validity of land claims)