Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, et al., v. Glaser et al
Filing
182
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 8/30/17, ORDERING this case DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(ii). CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
STEPHAN C. VOLKER (SBN 63093)
STEPHANIE L. CLARKE (SBN 254548)
DANIEL P. GARRETT-STEINMAN
(SBN 69146)
JAMEY M.B. VOLKER (SBN 273544)
Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker
1633 University Avenue
Berkeley, California 94703
Tel: 510/496-0600
Fax: 510/845-1255
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (SBN 36234)
PHILIP L. GREGORY (SBN 95217)
ERIC J. BUESCHER (SBN 271323)
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP
840 Malcolm Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Tel: 650/697-6000
Fax: 650/697-0577
Attorneys for Defendant San Luis & DeltaMendota Water Authority
14
JEFFREY H. WOOD
Acting Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
Environment & Natural Resources Division
MARTIN F. McDERMOTT
PAUL CIRINO
Environmental Defense Section, P.O. Box 7611
Washington, D.C. 20044-7611
Tel: 202/514-1542
Attorneys for Defendants David Murillo and
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
15
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
PACIFIC COAST FEDERATION OF
FISHERMEN’S ASSOCIATIONS, CALIFORNIA
SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE,
FRIENDS OF THE RIVER, SAN FRANCISCO
CRAB BOAT OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,
THE INSTITUTE FOR FISHERIES RESOURCES,
and FELIX SMITH,
Civ. No. 2:11-cv-02980-KJM-CKD
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO
FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)
Trial Date:
September 11, 2017
Plaintiffs,
Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller
v.
DAVID MURILLO, Regional Director of the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. BUREAU OF
RECLAMATION, and SAN LUIS & DELTAMENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY,
Defendants.
27
28
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
-1-
2:11-cv-02980-KJM-CKD
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
Plaintiffs, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, California Sportfishing
Protection Alliance, Friends of the River, the Institute for Fisheries Resources, and Felix Smith;
and Defendants, David Murillo, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and San Luis & Delta-Mendota
Water Authority (collectively with Plaintiffs, the “Parties”), hereby file this Stipulation of
Dismissal With Prejudice of the sole remaining claim in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint, and
request that the Court enter final judgment in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs’ First Amended
Complaint, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2013, the Court issued an Order dismissing Plaintiffs’
Complaint with leave to amend (Dkt. 70);
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2013, Plaintiffs filed the currently operative First Amended
Complaint (Dkt. 71);
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2014 the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in
part Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 87);
WHEREAS, on September 2, 2016, the Court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’ motion
for summary judgment and granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ motions for summary
judgment (Dkt. 138);
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2017, the Court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’ motion for
leave to file a Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. 162);
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2017, the Court issued a Final Pretrial Order (Dkt. 163);
WHEREAS, on August 9, 2017, the Court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’ motion for
reconsideration (Dkt. No. 175);
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2017, the Court issued an order tentatively striking as
irrelevant the majority of Plaintiffs’ disputed facts listed in the Final Pretrial Order (Dkt. 180);
WHEREAS, trial is currently set to begin on September 11, 2017 (Dkt. 176.);
WHEREAS, pursuant to the above orders, the sole issue remaining for trial is whether
discharges unrelated to crop production from subsurface drainage systems beneath the Vega Solar
27
28
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
-2-
2:11-cv-02980-KJM-CKD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Project make up a majority of discharges from the Grassland Bypass Project (the “Vega Claim”)
(see Dkt. 163 at 2, 4);
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the Vega Claim because the discharges
from the Vega Solar Project property do not make up a majority of discharges from the Grassland
Bypass Project;
WHEREAS, with the exception of the Vega Claim, the court has dismissed all other
claims in this suit; and,
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs have informed Defendants they plan to file an appeal of the final
judgment in this matter.
THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(ii) that Plaintiffs’ Vega Claim be dismissed with prejudice, and that the Court issue final
judgment in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint.
Accordingly, all previously set deadlines and hearings are VACATED. This case is
CLOSED.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated this 29th day of August, 2017.
17
LAW OFFICES OF STEPHAN C. VOLKER
18
By: /s/ Stephan C. Volker___
STEPHAN C. VOLKER
Attorney for Plaintiffs
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations,
et al.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: August 29, 2017
JEFFREY H. WOOD
Acting Assistant Attorney General
By: /s/ Paul Cirino
PAUL CIRINO
Environmental Defense Section
Ben Franklin Station, P.O. Box 7611
Washington, DC 20044-7611
Attorneys for Defendants
David Murillo and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
-3-
2:11-cv-02980-KJM-CKD
1
2
3
Dated: August 29, 2017
COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP
By: /s/ Eric J. Buescher
ERIC J. BUESCHER
4
5
LINNEMAN LAW LLP
6
DIANE V. RATHMANN
7
Attorneys for Defendant
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority
8
9
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
12
DATED: August 30, 2017.
13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
-4-
2:11-cv-02980-KJM-CKD
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?