Center for Biological Diversity, et al. v. Skalski, et al.

Filing 57

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 9/22/14: Plaintiffs are not oppose intervention as to the following: William and Mary Crook, Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions, and the California Farm Bureau Federation. Intervenors shall confine their arguments to the issues raised in the Complaint, avoid collateral arguments, and shall coordinate their briefing with Federal Defendants, so as to not produce a brief which is duplicative.(Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
FRESNO DIVISION

9
10
11
12
13

Case No. 1:14-cv-01382 GEB- GSA

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY, EARTH ISLAND
INSTITUTE, and CALIFORNIA
CHAPARRAL INSTITUTE

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Plaintiffs,

14
v.
15
16
17
18
19

SUSAN SKALSKI, in her official capacity
as Forest Supervisor for the Stanislaus
National Forest, and UNITED STATES
FOREST SERVICE, an agency of the
Department of Agriculture,
Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER

1

1

1

On September 10, 2014, Tuolumne County, American Forest Resource Council, California For-

2

estry Association, William and Mary Crook, Sierra Pacific Industries, Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions,

3

and the California Farm Bureau Federation (collectively “proposed Defendant-Intervenors”) moved to

4
5

intervene in this matter.
On September 16, 2014, Plaintiffs and proposed Defendant-Intervenors stipulated to the intervention of Tuolumne County, American Forest Resource Council, California Forestry Association, and Sier-

6

ra Pacific Industries.

7

Plaintiffs and proposed Defendant-Intervenors also agreed that proposed Defendant-Intervenors

8

would submit declarations regarding William and Mary Crook, Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions, and the

9

California Farm Bureau Federation, and Plaintiffs agreed to determine if they would oppose their inter-

10

vention by September 22, 2014.

11

Proposed Defendant-Intervenors and Plaintiffs have conferred and agree to stipulate as follows:

12

1.

Plaintiffs are willing to stipulate in this situation to not oppose intervention as to the

13

following: William and Mary Crook, Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions, and the California Farm Bureau

14

Federation.

15

2.

Intervenors shall confine their arguments to the issues raised in the Complaint, avoid

16

collateral arguments, and shall coordinate their briefing with Federal Defendants, so as to not produce a

17

brief which is duplicative.

18
19
20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 22, 2014

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Skalski, No: 1:14-cv-01382
Proposed Order

2