explained that: [Wjetlands possess the requisite nexus, and thus come within the statutory phrase “navigable waters,” if the wetlands, either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters more readily understood as “navigable.” When, in contrast, wetlands’ effects on water quality are speculative or insubstan tial, they fall outside the zone fairly encompassed by the statutory term “navigable waters.” Id. at 780, 126 S.Ct. 2208. There has been disagreement among courts as to how to apply the fragmented Rapanos decision. Compare N. Cal. River Watch v. City of Healdsburg, 496 F.3d 993, 999-1000 (9th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 1225, 170 L.Ed.2d 61 (2008) (<HOLDING>) with U.S. v. Johnson, 467 F.3d 56, 60-66 (1st
holding that the ordinary observer test should be the sole test for determining whether a design patent has been infringed holding that justice kennedys test provides the controlling rule for determining jurisdiction holding that rule 4k2 provides an alternative basis for jurisdiction to the extent that plaintiffs allegations do not support jurisdiction under the virginia longarm statute holding the correct date to use when determining the controlling statute is date upon which the claim arose holding that jurisdiction exists if either the pluralitys test or kennedys test is met