On October 31, 2016, in NRDC v. County of Los Angeles, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that dismissal of injunctive claims due to mootness was a denial of injunctive relief that gave rise to appellate court jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) ( (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2016)).

The plaintiffs, Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica Baykeeper, filed a lawsuit in 2008 in which they sought civil penalties and injunctive relief against the defendants, the County of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. The plaintiffs' lawsuit was based on claims that the defendants violated the terms of a 2001 stormwater discharge permit.

In 2012, the defendants obtained a new stormwater discharge permit and moved to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that their compliance with the 2012 permit mooted the plaintiffs' claims. The district court declined to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims for civil penalties for past violations but dismissed the plaintiffs' claim for injunctive relief after finding that it was moot.

The plaintiffs filed an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), which provides appellate jurisdiction over a district court's order denying an injunction. The defendants argued that the Ninth Circuit did not have appellate jurisdiction, reasoning that 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) did not confer jurisdiction over the dismissal of a claim for an injunction due to mootness.

The Ninth Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs, reasoning that:

In holding as it did, the Ninth Circuit joined the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which held in Holmes v. Fisher that the dismissal of injunctive claims due to mootness conferred the appellate court with jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) (854 F.2d 229 (7th. Cir. 1988)).