U.S. District Court, District of Oregon. 3:25-cv-01334 (Judge Michael H. Simon). Filed 2025. This page covers what is challenged, where the case stands, and who is covered by any relief granted.
This page is free to read and updated weekly, and the fee calculator needs a free EPR Atlas account.
Last updated October 25, 2026.
U.S. District Court, District of Oregon | 3:25-cv-01334 (Judge Michael H. Simon) | Filed 2025 current October 25, 2026
This summary of where the case stands is not legal advice. If your exposure is material, confirm it with counsel.
The constitutionality of the Recycling Modernization Act itself, on dormant Commerce Clause and procedural due process grounds.
Decided, and on appeal to the Ninth Circuit. On August 27, 2026 Judge Simon issued 71-page Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (ECF 205) holding that the Recycling Modernization Act violates neither the dormant Commerce Clause nor the Due Process Clause. All three dormant Commerce Clause theories failed: no protectionist purpose, no facial discrimination in the public body exemption (NAW also lacked standing and fell outside the zone of interests), no proven discriminatory effect from the revenue and immediate consumption exemptions, no unreasonable user fee, and no substantial burden under Pike. Both due process theories failed: the RMA does not compel joining CAA, because a producer may form its own PRO or exempt itself under the private recycling rule at ORS 459A.869(13), and DEQ retains ultimate decision-making authority over the fee methodology. Neither the opinion nor the judgment says what becomes of the February 6, 2026 preliminary injunction, and the opinion mentions it only in its procedural history. Final judgment was entered for the Director on August 28, 2026 (ECF 206), so the case is over in the district court. NAW filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on September 24, 2026 (ECF 209), inside the September 28 deadline under FRAP 4(a)(1)(A). The Ninth Circuit docketed the appeal on September 30, 2026 as No. 26-6404 and set the briefing schedule, with NAW’s opening brief due December 17, 2026 and Oregon’s answering brief due January 18, 2027. On the district court docket, accessed October 21, 2026, the other post-judgment entries are transcripts (ECF 207, 208, and 211), NAW's transcript designation (ECF 210, October 12), the September 30, 2026 entry recording the Ninth Circuit case number, and an October 16, 2026 entry (ECF 212), described in the docket text as a Motion for Stay Pending Appeal filed by NAW, with declarations from Ed Allen, Corey Rodriguez, and James E. Winkle. The docket shows no order on it, and the docket text does not say what NAW asks the court to stay. The Ninth Circuit docket, last updated on the free mirror October 21, 2026, shows no motion for a stay or for an injunction pending appeal through its newest entry, Dkt. 8 of October 14, 2026.
The February 6, 2026 preliminary injunction covered NAW and companies that were NAW members on that date and nobody else, and neither the August 27, 2026 decision nor the August 28 judgment says what becomes of it. Nothing has been dissolved on the docket, but the merits ruling removes the basis on which it was granted, so members should not plan around it continuing. Every other producer remains subject to registration, reporting, fees, and DEQ enforcement. Another limit on the public record was the Lollicup stipulation, under which DEQ agreed not to issue pre-enforcement notices to Lollicup or its putative class until at least August 31, 2026 (terms as summarized by Arnold and Porter); an October 9, 2026 entry in that case (ECF 13) is labeled Stay with no text on the free docket (Lollicup docket accessed October 12, 2026).
The main filings, orders, and related events are listed in date order, and a date marked scheduled has not happened yet.
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| 2025 | Complaint filed challenging the constitutionality of the Recycling Modernization Act. |
| February 6, 2026 | Preliminary injunction granted. It shields companies that were NAW members on this date and nobody else. |
| April 1, 2026 | Court denies motions to intervene by the American Forest and Paper Association and by a group of retail associations (the Oregon Business and Industry Association, the Northwest Grocery Retail Association, and Food Northwest), finding them untimely and prejudicial to the expedited trial date. |
| July 13 to 17, 2026 | Five-day bench trial, roughly 34 hours of testimony. Oregon called five witnesses: Nicole Portley, Erin Saylor, David Allaway (all DEQ), Scott Cassel (Product Stewardship Institute), and Reid Lifset (Yale). NAW called eight, including Calvin Lakhan (York University). |
| July 17, 2026 | Trial concludes. Judge Simon states from the bench that he has not made up his mind, and directs the parties to address six specific questions in post-trial briefing. |
| July 31, 2026 | Post-trial briefs due. |
| August 3, 2026 | Deadline for any motion seeking additional oral argument. |
| August 4, 2026 | Court declines oral argument and orders five-page supplemental briefs on one question: whether the small producer exemption for Oregon public bodies is facially discriminatory. |
| August 27, 2026 | Decision. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (ECF 205, 71 pages) hold that the Recycling Modernization Act violates neither the dormant Commerce Clause nor the Due Process Clause. The opinion recites the February 6, 2026 preliminary injunction but issues no order dissolving or modifying it. |
| August 28, 2026 | Final judgment entered in favor of Defendant Feldon and against NAW (ECF 206). A notice of appeal was due by September 28, 2026 under FRAP 4(a)(1)(A). |
| September 24, 2026 | NAW files a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from the August 28 judgment (ECF 209). |
| September 30, 2026 | The Ninth Circuit dockets the appeal as No. 26-6404 and sets the briefing schedule (Dkt. 1 and 2). |
| December 17, 2026 scheduled | NAW opening brief due in the Ninth Circuit (No. 26-6404, Dkt. 2). |
| January 18, 2027 scheduled | Oregon answering brief due in the Ninth Circuit (No. 26-6404, Dkt. 2). |
Dates are drawn from court filings, orders, and firm alerts as reported. Where a docket is not publicly accessible the Atlas relies on secondary reporting and says so.
Status as of October 25, 2026. Dockets accessed on CourtListener October 25, 2026: the district court mirror last refreshed October 20, 2026 at 7:53 a.m. (newest entry ECF 212 of October 16, 2026), and the Ninth Circuit mirror for No. 26-6404 last refreshed October 21, 2026 at 1:29 p.m. (newest entry Dkt. 8 of October 14, 2026), so any filing after those times is not visible here.
Every state guide has the fee schedule where one has been published, registration deadlines, program plan status, eco-modulation detail, the statute and any implementing rule, and exemptions.