United States of America v. Sierra Pacific Industries et al

Filing 618

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 11/24/2014: The court requires briefing on the threshold issue as follows: Sierra Pacific shall file its brief no later than 1/15/2015. The government shall file an opposition no later than 2/17/20 15. Sierra Pacific shall then file a reply no later than 3/9/2015. Oral argument limited to the threshold issue will be heard at 2:00 p.m. on 4/6/2015. Sierra Pacific's request to reopen discovery is denied without prejudice. The 12/15/2014 hearing on the government's motion to disqualify counsel for defendants is vacated. For that motion and Sierra Pacific's motion to temporarily stay its obligations under the settlement agreement, the court will not set hearing dates or require briefing until after it resolves the threshold issue of whether Sierra Pacific can seek relief under Rule 60(d)(3). (See document for further details.) (Kirksey Smith, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

----oo0oo----

11
12

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

13
14
15
16

CIV. NO. 2:09-02445 WBS AC

Plaintiff,
ORDER

v.
SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES, et
al.,
Defendants,

17
18
19

AND ALL RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS.

20

----oo0oo----

21
On November 24, 2014, the court held a status

22
23

conference to address defendant Sierra Pacific Industries’

24

(“Sierra Pacific”) motion to set aside the July 2012 settlement

25

of this matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

26

60(d)(3).

27

conference.

28

The parties were represented by counsel at the

Rule 60(d)(3) provides that a court may “set aside a
1

1

judgment for fraud on the court” at any time.

2

60(d)(3).

3

fraud on the court under Rule 60(d)(3), its motion is untimely.

4

See id. R. 60(b), (c)(1), (d)(3).

5

Fed. R. Civ. P.

The parties agree that, unless Sierra Pacific can show

As agreed at the conference, before evaluating the

6

merits of Sierra Pacific’s accusations, the court will resolve

7

the threshold issue of whether the alleged conduct giving rise to

8

Sierra Pacific’s Rule 60(d)(3) motion constitutes “fraud on the

9

court.”

10
11

The court will therefore require the parties to submit

briefs and hear oral argument limited to this threshold issue.
Focused briefing shall be submitted limited to: (1)

12

identifying the test for “fraud on the court” under Rule 60(d)(3)

13

and what Sierra Pacific must prove to seek relief under that

14

subsection; (2) addressing whether, assuming the truth of Sierra

15

Pacific’s allegations, each alleged act of misconduct separately

16

or collectively constitutes “fraud on the court” within the

17

meaning of Rule 60(d)(3); and (3) explaining how and when Sierra

18

Pacific discovered the alleged misconduct, specifically

19

identifying whether Sierra Pacific learned of each alleged act

20

before or after the settlement and dismissal of the case.

21

Sierra Pacific shall file its brief limited to the

22

aforementioned issues no later than January 15, 2015.

The

23

government shall file an opposition limited to these issues no

24

later than February 17, 2015.

25

reply similarly limited to the identified issues no later than

26

March 9, 2015.

27

will be heard at 2:00 p.m. on April 6, 2015.

28

request to reopen discovery is denied without prejudice.

Sierra Pacific shall then file a

Oral argument limited to that threshold issue

2

Sierra Pacific’s

1

The December 15, 2014 hearing on the government’s

2

motion to disqualify counsel for defendants is vacated.

3

motion and Sierra Pacific’s motion to temporarily stay its

4

obligations under the settlement agreement, the court will not

5

set hearing dates or require briefing until after it resolves the

6

threshold issue of whether Sierra Pacific can seek relief under

7

Rule 60(d)(3).

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 24, 2014

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

For that