Nothing new in that.
WDC stated they were withdrawing from the interim hearing _in which they were going to get an injuction to have the terminal closed_ BEFORE the hearing DUE TO STRONG EVIDENCE from the Airport. Methinks they did not prepare their case well enough and had to pull out to get extra time to prepare it (Which is what, effectively, their legal team advised them to do.).
This left the Airport to make an attempt to get the case struck off as there is no case to answer (In their opinion.)
The sad fact is that by skipping this step it does not mean proceedings will go any faster. It'll probably slow them down.
WDC are also qouted as saying, during the hearing, that they really want the enfrocement order to use as a bargainning tool.
So, they had weak evidence for the court case, and are wasting taxpayers (Not mine, thankfully) money on taking the airport to court when they have _stated_ that they have no intention of forcing the airport to close even if they do have an enforcement.
They have also - much to the frustration of CA - refused to enter into any talks.
So then they get whalloped with evidence that's too overwhelming for them. They state this on their website as well.