Roger Robb

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit circuit Retired 1985 · served 1969–1985 Appointed by Richard Nixon (Republican) 25 signed orders read

Judge Robb no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Robb decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Robb sustained agency action when its resolution was reasonable, supported by the record, and within its discretion.

“The Commission has not abused its discretion. Its resolution of the contentions raised in the petitions for review is reasonable and supported by the record.”

Procedural preferences

Robb required agencies to support comparative judgments with an evidentiary record that allowed meaningful review.

“From the Commission’s opinion and the record as a whole we are unable to discern a reasonable basis for the Commission’s conclusion with respect to automobiles.”

He required summary-judgment submissions to identify the material facts supporting an agency’s asserted exemption theory.

“The CIA’s inadequate Rule l-9(h) Statement makes it impossible for us to determine whether genuine issues of material fact existed when summary judgment was granted.”

Cautions

He narrowed injunctive relief that extended beyond the specific advisory relationship established by the record.

“We agree with the Administrator, however, that the District Court’s order is too broad.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

United States v. Andre M. Millings
· 1976-05-13
Appeal (Andre M. Millings) Granted

“The judgment of the District Court is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial.”

Kraft Foods v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America
· 1976-07-13
Petition for review (Kraft Foods) Granted

“The order of the Federal Maritime Commission is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings on the merits of the Kraft claim.”

Gaf Corp. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission
· 1977-06-28
Petition for review (GAF Corporation) Denied

“GAF’s petition to review and reverse the decision of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission is denied.”

United States v. Mackin
· 1977-07-15
Appeal (Margaret Mackin and Erana Gibson) Denied

“The Judgments are Affirmed.”

Teleprompter Cable Communications Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission
· 1977-09-19
Petition for review (Teleprompter Cable Communications Corporation) Granted

“The Commission’s orders denying Teleprompter’s application for a certificate of compliance and revoking its authority to import the Los Angeles signals are reversed. The case is remanded to the Commission with instructions to grant the requested certificates of compliance.”

Wolfsburger Transport-Gesellschaft M. B. H. v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America, Pacific Maritime Association, Intervenor
· 1977-10-05
Petition for review (Wolfsburger Transport-Gesellschaft) Granted

“Accordingly the case is remanded to the Commission for further proceedings to develop a reasonable and understandable comparison between the benefits accruing to breakbulk cargo and those realized by automobiles.”

International Distributing Corp. v. American District Telegraph Co.
· 1977-12-19
Appeal (International Distributing Corporation) Granted in part

“Consequently, the summary judgment on the tort counts must be reversed and the case remanded for trial. The judgment is Reversed in part, Affirmed in part.”

Roger L. Priest v. The Secretary of the Navy
· 1977-12-30
Appeal (Roger L. Priest) Denied

“we affirm the judgment of the District Court.”

Koniag, Inc. v. Andrus
· 1978-04-28
Appeal (Alaska Native villages and government parties) Granted in part

“The judgment of the District Court is Affirmed in part, reversed in part.”

Diamond Shamrock Corporation v. Douglas M. Costle, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
· 1978-05-30
Appeal (Diamond Shamrock Corporation and other chemical manufacturers) Denied

“Accordingly, we affirm the District Court’s dismissal.”

Center for Auto Safety v. William M. Cox, Individually, and as Federal Highway Administrator
· 1978-06-14
Appeal (Federal Highway Administrator and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) Granted in part

“Because we conclude that the FHWA utilized AASHTO as an advisory committee during the development of the Certification Acceptance regulations, we affirm. We agree with the Administrator, however, that the District Court’s order is too broad. Accordingly, the injunction must be modified to apply the Federal Advisory Committee Act only to consultation between the FHWA and AASHTO on matters concerning proposed regulations.”

Halkin v. Helms
· 1978-06-16
Appeal (Plaintiffs and federal officials on cross-appeals) Granted in part

“Therefore, that part of the District Court’s order rejecting the claim of privilege and requiring the defendants to respond to the allegations in the complaint referring to operation SHAMROCK is reversed. In all other respects the decision is affirmed. The case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Not applicable to this circuit-court record.

A historical record

Judge Robb no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.