Plaintiffs owned a group of parcels in the Township that they claimed were incapable of being developed under the Township’s special land use regulations, and because the Township and co-defendant construction company allegedly prevented them from connecting their properties to a water main and sewer line during construction of an adjacent road. They sued under theories including due process and equal protection violations, a taking, and tortious interference with contracts. However, the record showed that Plaintiffs had either obtained every land use approval that they had ever applied for, never appealed those that were denied, and/or never actually applied for uses that they claimed individual Township employees suggested would be difficult at the site. The District Court granted a motion to dismiss the takings claims and several other claims prior to discovery, and granted the Township summary judgment on all other claims after discovery. The Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding that Plaintiffs had no protected property right in special land use approvals as required for their due process claims, failed to identify any similarly situated property owners who received approvals despite failing to apply, and that Plaintiffs received no adverse final decisions to ripen a takings claim.