J. Jack Bras, Individually and Doing Business as J. Jack Bras & Associates v. California Public Utilities Commission

Opinion by Chief Judge WALLACE; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON.

Bras appeals from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission), dismissing his equal protection claims for lack of standing. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse and remand.

I

From 1969 to 1991, Bras provided architectural services to Pacific Bell. Approximately 30 percent of Bras’s gross receipts after 1983 came from work generated by Pacific Bell. On February 1, 1991, Bras was asked to complete a “prequalification criteria” form. The form was to be used by Pacific Bell to select a group of architectural firms to submit proposals and, if selected, to enter into “improved business partnerships.” Question 10 on the form asked: “[A]re you currently certified through the Cordoba Corporation Clearing House process for Minority/Women Business Enterprise status?” Bras completed the form, answering question 10 in the negative, and returned the form to Pacific Bell on February 4, 1991.

In June 1991, Bras was informed by Pacific Bell that a business decision was made to work closely with a small number of suppliers in…

dissenting:

As a plaintiff who seeks injunctive or declaratory relief, Jack Bras “must show ‘a very significant possibility’ of future harm in order to have standing to bring suit.” Coral Construction Co. v. King County, 941 F.2d 910, 929 (9th Cir.1991) (quoting Nelsen v. King County, 895 F.2d 1248, 1250 (9th Cir.1990)), ce rt. denied, 502 U.S. 1033 , 112 S.Ct. 875 , 116 L.Ed.2d 780 (1992). Because Bras cannot demonstrate future harm caused by the actions of the California Public Utilities Commission (“Commission”), I dissent.

The majority relies on Northeastern Fla. Gen. Contractors v. Jacksonville, — U.S. -, -, 113 S.Ct. 2297, 2303 , 124 L.Ed.2d 586 (1993), for its contention that Bras, who settled with Pacific Bell, has standing in his lawsuit against the Commission to challenge provisions — General Order 156 (“Order”) and Cal.Pub.Util.Code § 8283 (“Code”) — that require contractors to establish goals for women and minority participation in California public contracting. The original Jacksonville ordinance at issue in Northeastern, — U.S. at -, 113 S.Ct. at 2303 , provided that 10 percent of the amount spent each year on city contracts be set aside for minority or women…

59 F.3d 869 64 USLW 2057 , 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5132 , 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8845 J. Jack BRAS, individually and doing business as J. Jack Bras & Associates, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-15764. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 13, 1994. Decided July 5, 1995. Pamela A. Lewis, Schneider & Wallerstein, San Jose, CA, for plaintiff-appellant. Timothy E. Treacy, Public Utilities Com'n of the State of Cal., San Francisco, for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, PREGERSON and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Chief Judge WALLACE; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON. WALLACE, Chief Judge: 1 Bras appeals from the district court's summary judgment in favor of the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission), dismissing his equal protection claims for lack of standing. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We reverse and remand. 2 * From 1969 to 1991, Bras provided architectural services to Pacific Bell. Approximately 30 percent of Bras's…