for challenging FERC’s alleged encroachment of the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction. Congress specified that “[a]ny party to a proceeding under this Act aggrieved by an order issued by FERC in such proceeding may obtain a review of such order in the court of appeals of the United States.” NGA § 19(b). The statutory language is clear that a challenge to FERC’s jurisdiction must be brought in a circuit court, not a district court. See Merritt v. Shuttle, Inc., 245 F.3d 182, 187 (2d Cir.2001) (statutes that “vest judicial review of administrative orders exclusively in the courts of appeals also preclude district courts from hearing claims that are ‘inescapably intertwined’ with review of such orders”); see also Consolidated Gas Supply Corp. v. FERC, 611 F.2d 951, 957 (4th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Amaranth’s assertion that FERC
holding that because the nga vests exclusive jurisdiction to review all decisions of the commission in the circuit court of appeals there is no area of review whether relating to final or preliminary orders available in the district court internal citations omitted holding that the federal district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review plaintiffs complaint to the extent they sought review  of the district of columbia court of appeals denial of their petitions holding that this court lacked preliminary authority to review the district courts jurisdiction because there was no immediately appealable order before the court holding that this courts review of board decisions is limited to final orders or final decisions holding that the court does not have jurisdiction to review per curiam decisions of the district courts of appeal that merely affirm with citations to cases not pending review in this court