Norton

MEMORANDUM *

Because the parties are familiar with the facts and the procedural history underlying this appeal, we mention them only insofar as necessary to explain our decision.

The Institute for Wildlife (the “Institute”) appeals from the district court’s dismissal of Claims II and III in its Second Amended Complaint. These claims allege the Secretary of the Interior (the “Secretary”) and the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the “Service”) have (Claim II) repeatedly delayed responding to citizen petitions to list new endangered species in violation of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and (Claim III) promoted discretionary tasks ahead of their mandatory duty to make timely findings on citizen petitions. The district court dismissed these claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) because they are “programmatic challenges, and thus are not within the Court’s jurisdiction to grant relief.”

*485 We review de novo a district court’s dismissal pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) of a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc., 328 F.3d 1136, 1139 (9th Cir.2003).

Here, the…