County of Amador v. The United States Department of the Interior et al

Filing 81

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 7/3/14 ORDERING that Amador County's Stipulated Application to file 50-page combined Brief 80 is GRANTED. The County of Amador may file a combined Summary Judgment Opposition and Reply, presently due on 9/4/14, not to exceed 50 pages.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

NIELSEN MERKSAMER
PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
JAMES R. PARRINELLO, ESQ. (S.B. NO. 63415)
CHRISTOPHER E. SKINNELL, ESQ. (S.B. NO. 227093)
2350 Kerner Boulevard, Suite 250
San Rafael, California 94901
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
NIELSEN MERKSAMER
PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
CATHY A. CHRISTIAN, ESQ. (S.B. NO. 83196)
1415 L Street, Suite 1200
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

11
12

Attorneys for Plaintiff
COUNTY OF AMADOR, CALIFORNIA

13
14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
)
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
)
OF THE INTERIOR; S.M.R. JEWELL,
)
Secretary of the United States Department )
)
of Interior; KEVIN WASHBURN,
)
Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs,
)
United States Department of Interior,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
THE IONE BAND OF MIWOK INDIANS, )
)
Intervenor Defendant )
)
COUNTY OF AMADOR, CALIFORNIA,

Case No. 2:12-cv-01710-TLN-CKD
AMADOR COUNTY’S
STIPULATED APPLICATION
TO FILE 50-PAGE COMBINED
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT AND IN
OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ AND
INTERVENER-DEFENDANT’S
MOTIONS; ORDER

DATE: November 6, 2014
TIME:
2:00 p.m.
JUDGE: Hon. Troy L. Nunley
(Courtroom No. 2)

________________________________________________________________________________
AMADOR COUNTY’S STIPULATED APPLICATION TO FILE
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01710-TLN-CKD
50-PAGE SUMMARY JUDGMENT OPPOSITION/REPLY

1

On September 4, 2014, Plaintiff County of Amador is due to file a brief combining its (1)

2

reply in favor of its motion for summary judgment, filed May 1, 2014, and (2) its oppositions to the

3

respective motions for summary judgment of Defendants and Intervener-Defendant. See Amended

4

Pretrial Scheduling Order (Dkt. #62), ¶ V.3; Order Granting Extensions of Time (Dkt. #79), p. 4.

5
6

The County, by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby seeks permission from this
Court to file a combined reply/opposition not to exceed 50 pages.

7

Good cause exists because the Court, in its Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order, provided

8

that “[e]ach party’s combined briefs shall not exceed a total of 70 pages.” However, that limit puts

9

the County at a disadvantage relative to the other parties because the County—unlike Defendants

10

and Intervener-Defendant—will be responding to two motions/oppositions, instead of only one.

11

The County’s initial moving papers were 41 pages long,1 leaving it only 29 pages for a

12

combined opposition/reply to both motions, which the County expects will be substantial, given the

13

important issues raised by this action. The requested 50 pages basically equates to 20 pages in

14

opposition to each of the anticipated motions, and a ten-page reply brief in support the County’s

15

own motion for summary judgment. That is consistent with this Court’s normal page limits,

16

contained in its standing order.

17
18

Counsel for Defendants and Intervener-Defendant have stated, on behalf of their clients,
that they do not oppose this application.
Respectfully submitted,

19
20

Dated: July 2, 2014

21
22
23
24

NIELSEN MERKSAMER
PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
By: /s/ Christopher E. Skinnell
James R. Parrinello
Cathy A. Christian
Christopher E. Skinnell
Attorneys for Plaintiff
AMADOR COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

25
26
27
28

1

See Amador County’s Notice of Motion & Motion for Summary Judgment; Memorandum
of Points & Authorities In Support Of Same (Dkt. #65).
________________________________________________________________________________
AMADOR COUNTY’S STIPULATED APPLICATION TO FILE
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01710-TLN-CKD
50-PAGE SUMMARY JUDGMENT OPPOSITION/REPLY
Page 1

ORDER

1
2

Upon consideration of the Amador County’s Stipulated Application to File 50-Page

3

Combined Brief in Support of Its Motion For Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendants’

4

and Intervener-Defendant’s Motions (Dkt. #80), and good cause having been shown, it is hereby

5

ORDERED that:

6

1. The Application is GRANTED. The County of Amador may file a combined Summary

7

Judgment Opposition and Reply, presently due on September 4, 2014, not to exceed 50 pages.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated: July 3, 2014

10
11
12
13

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
________________________________________________________________________________
AMADOR COUNTY’S STIPULATED APPLICATION TO FILE
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01710-TLN-CKD
50-PAGE SUMMARY JUDGMENT OPPOSITION/REPLY
Page 2