San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority et al v. Salazar et al

Filing 546

ORDER Following January 11, 2010 Scheduling Conference, signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 1/29/2010. (Gaumnitz, R)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD
ATTORN E Y S AT LAW S A C R A M EN T O

DANIEL J. O'HANLON, State Bar No. 122380 K. ERIC ADAIR, State Bar No. 150650 HANSPETER WALTER, State Bar No. 244847 KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD 400 Capitol Mall, 27th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] EILEEN M. DIEPENBROCK, State Bar No. 119254 JON D. RUBIN, State Bar No. 196944 JONATHAN R. MARZ, State Bar No. 221188 DIEPENBROCK HARRISON 400 Capitol Mall, 18th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiffs SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY; WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE DELTA SMELT CASES SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY, et al. v. SALAZAR, et al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-407) STATE WATER CONTRACTORS v. SALAZAR, et al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-422) COALITION FOR A SUSTAINABLE DELTA, et al. v. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, et al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-480) METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT v. UNITED STATES FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE, et al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-631) STEWART & JASPER ORCHARDS, et al. v. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, et al. Case No. 1:09-cv-892)

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-407-OWW-DLB 1:09-cv-422-OWW-DLB 1:09-cv-631-OWW-DLB 1:09-cv-892-OWW-GSA PARTIALLY CONSOLIDATED WITH: 1:09-cv-480-OWW-GSA ORDER FOLLOWING JANUARY 11, 2010 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE Judge: Hon. Oliver W. Wanger

932056.1

-1Order Following January 11, 2010 Scheduling Conference

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD
ATTORN E Y S AT LAW S A C R A M EN T O

The Court held a scheduling conference in these consolidated actions on January 11, 2010, at the request of plaintiffs. Plaintiffs San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District were represented by Daniel J. O'Hanlon, Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard; plaintiffs Coalition for a Sustainable Delta and Kern County Water Agency were represented by Robert Thornton and Paul S. Weiland, Nossaman LLP; plaintiff Metropolitan Water District of Southern California was represented by Christopher J. Carr, Morrison & Forester LLP, and Linus Masouredis; plaintiff State Water Contractors was represented by Gregory K. Wilkinson, Best Best & Krieger LLP; plaintiffs Stewart & Jasper Orchards, et al., were represented by Brandon M. Middleton, Pacific Legal Foundation; Federal Defendants were represented by Ethan Eddy, S. Jay Govindan and William J. Shapiro, United States Department of Justice; defendant-intervenors Natural Resources Defense Council and The Bay Institute were represented by Katherine Poole and George M. Torgun; California Department of Water Resources was represented by Clifford T. Lee and Allison Goldsmith; and the Family Farm Alliance was represented by Brenda Davis, The Brenda Davis Law Group. The plaintiffs requested the conference to address the circumstance of the unavailability of an expert witness, Dr. Deriso, to appear and testify on the date scheduled to hear testimony relating to plaintiffs' pending motion for interim remedies and preliminary injunction. An evidentiary hearing on the motion had been set for January 20 through 22, and February 2 and 3. At the scheduling conference, counsel for the plaintiff Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Mr. Carr, reported that due to a recent heart attack, Dr. Deriso would not be able to proceed with his testimony beginning on January 20. Further, counsel reported that it was uncertain when Dr. Deriso would be sufficiently recovered to testify. Counsel expected that Dr. Deriso would have a better sense of his availability by January 26. Counsel for plaintiff Metropolitan Water District of Southern California requested an extension of time, until January 26, 2010, to file reply papers, including a declaration by Dr. Deriso, in support of the motion for interim remedies and preliminary injunction. No party objected to this request for extension of time. Counsel for plaintiffs San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water -2Order Following January 11, 2010 Scheduling Conference

932056.1

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD
ATTORN E Y S AT LAW S A C R A M EN T O

District, Mr. O'Hanlon, advised the Court that these plaintiffs did not wish to proceed with the hearing as scheduled if Dr. Deriso was unavailable to testify. No party objected to the postponement of the hearing. Counsel for these plaintiffs further requested that the hearing be reset for mid-March. Federal defendants and defendant-intervenors objected to setting the hearing in mid-March unless some change is made to the March 19 deadline for filing their opposition to cross-motions for summary judgment. At the scheduling conference, the Court tentatively set new dates of March 17, 18, 19 and 23, 2010 for hearing testimony related to the motion for interim remedies and preliminary injunction. However, upon further consideration of its calendar, and the unavailability of the Court's FRE 706 experts on March 18 and 19, by notice filed on January 14, 2010, the Court requested the parties to consider the alternative dates of March 9, 10 and 11, 2010. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District

plaintiffs' motion for interim remedies and preliminary injunction previously set for January 20, 21, 22 and February 2 and 3, 2010 will be reset following a further status conference. 2. The Court will hold a further telephonic status conference in this matter on

January 26, 2010 at noon, to receive a report regarding Dr. Deriso's expected availability to testify and to address future scheduling. 3. The March dates proposed above for the hearing on the motion for interim

remedies and preliminary injunction, and any alternative dates, will be discussed at the January 26, 2010 telephonic status conference. 4. After the date for hearing the motion for preliminary injunction has been settled,

the parties shall meet and confer regarding adjustments, if any, to the schedule for briefing the cross-motions for summary judgment. If the parties reach agreement on the briefing schedule, they shall present a stipulation to the Court. Absent such agreement, the Court shall set the briefing schedule in a further status conference. 5. The time for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to file its reply

in support of the motion for interim remedies and preliminary injunction is extended to 932056.1 -3Order Following January 11, 2010 Scheduling Conference

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD
ATTORN E Y S AT LAW S A C R A M EN T O

January 26, 2010. 6. Counsel for the plaintiff Farm Family Alliance in Case No. 09-cv-1201-OWW

shall confer with counsel for the other plaintiffs regarding presentation of evidence at the hearing of the motion for interim remedies and preliminary injunction, and at the January 26, 2010 status conference shall be prepared to address its anticipated role and what evidence it will seek to present in that hearing.

DATED: January 29, 2010

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER Unites States Senior District Court Judge

932056.1

-4Order Following January 11, 2010 Scheduling Conference

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com