Natural Resources Defense Council et al v. Norton et al

Filing 1348

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RULING signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on April 8, 2019. (ECF NOS. 1336 & 1337)(Munoz, I)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE
COUNCIL, et al.,

Case No. 1:05-cv-01207 LJO-EPG
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RULING
(ECF NOS. 1336 & 1337)

Plaintiffs,

11
vs.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

DAVID BERNHARDT, Acting Secretary,
U.S. Department of the Interior, et al.,
Defendants.
SAN LUIS & DELTA MENDOTA WATER
AUTHORITY, et al.,
Defendant-Intervenors.
ANDERSON-COTTONWOOD IRRIGATION
DISTRICT, et al.,
Joined Parties.

19
20
Before the Court for decision is the one paragraph motion for reconsideration filed by Defendant
21
Intervenors, ECF No. 1336, joined (also in a one paragraph filing) by Federal Defendants. ECF No.
22
23

1337. Rather than directing the Court’s attention to any reasons why the moving parties believe the
magistrate judge’s ruling was “clear error,” see L.R. 303, the moving parties have simply string-cited

24
every brief they previously filed on the matter. The Court has afforded this motion for reconsideration
25
1

1

far more time and thought than did the moving parties. Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s ruling in

2

light of the record and applicable law, the motion is DENIED. See ECF Nos. 1311 & 1244; Fed. R. Civ.

3

P. 45; U.S. Const., art. III, § 2.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

April 8, 2019

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2