Brown

Opinion by Judge PREGERSON; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge RYMER.

Plaintiffs-Appellants American Tunaboat Association, et al. (“ATA”) appeal the district court’s order denying a preliminary injunction to prevent Defendants-Appellees Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce, et al. from enforcing a Notice of Fishery Closure. They also seek review of the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment that decided the merits of the request for an injunction against enforcing the fishing ban for the remainder of the 1994 season. Thus, the preliminary injunction motion and the relief sought in the summary judgment motion are the same — to enjoin enforcement of the fishery’s closure. On February 7, 1994, the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) prohibited ATA from engaging in purse seine tuna fishing for the remainder of 1994. NMFS concluded that ATA had already reached the quota set by the International Dolphin Conservation Act (“IDCA”) for the number of dolphin mortalities that may result in 1994 from the purse seining of tuna. The district court upheld NMFS’s interpretation of the IDCA. The district court also *1406 concluded that ATA failed to satisfy the…

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

Although as a practical matter it makes good sense to go ahead and resolve the appeal from the district court’s entry of summary judgment, it is only a partial summary *1412 judgment. Since the preliminary injunction is moot, the partial summary judgment doesn’t seem to me to act to deny any preliminary relief. Because I think we therefore lack jurisdiction over the summary judgment issues, I concur only in Parts La and 2 of the opinion.