Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign et al v Rey et al

Filing 282

ORDER denying #261 Motion for Permanent Injunction signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/20/09. (Kaminski, H)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Plaintiffs, 12 v. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On March 1, 2007, the lead Plaintiff herein, Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign, changed its name to Sierra Forest Legacy. 1
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SIERRA NEVADA FOREST PROTECTION CAMPAIGN,1 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, SIERRA CLUB, and THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY, non-profit organizations,

No. 2:05-cv-00205-MCE-GGH

ORDER

MARK REY, in his official capacity as Under Secretary of Agriculture, DALE BOSWORTH, in his official capacity as Chief of the United States Forest Service, JACK BLACKWELL, in his official capacity as Regional Forester, Region 5, United States Forest Service, and JAMES M. PEŅA, in his official capacity as Forest Supervisor, Plumas National Forest, Defendants. and TUOLUMNE COUNTY ALLIANCE FOR RESOURCES & ENVIRONMENT, et al.; CALIFORNIA SKI INDUSTRY ASS'N'; QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP, et al.; and CALIFORNIA CATTLEMEN'S ASS'N, Defendants-Intervenors.

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

By Order filed December 19, 2008, this Court rescheduled the remedies hearing in this matter pending disposition of Petitions for Rehearing filed with regard to the Ninth Circuit's panel decision in Sierra Forest Legacy v. Rey, 526 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 2008). The parties were directed to notify the Court once a

decision in that regard is reached. Counsel for Sierra Legacy herein presented their remedies argument to the Court through a Motion for Permanent Injunction. Despite asking for the same remedy, the attorneys for the State of California in People v. United States Department of Agriculture, et al., Case No. 2:05-cv-2100-MCE-GGH, one of the cases related to the instant action, did not file a separate motion. The Court, in requesting remedies briefing, did not

contemplate an additional motion being filed. Although Sierra Legacy may still elect to proceed with an actual Motion for Permanent Injunction should it choose to do so, in the interest of clearing the Court's pending docket until a decision from the Ninth Circuit is forthcoming, the Court DENIES the current Motion (Docket No. 261), without prejudice to its renewal once the Petitions for Rehearing in the Sierra Forest Legacy v. Rey matter have been adjudicated. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 20, 2009

_____________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2