Conservation Congress v. U.S. Forest Service et al

Filing 22

NON-RELATED CASE ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 1/9/2013 ORDERING 7 that this Court DECLINES to relate case(s) 2:11-CV-2605 LKK EFB and 2:12-CV-2800 GEB CKD. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
CONSERVATION CONGRESS,
9
Plaintiff,
NO. CIV. S-11-2605 LKK/EFB

10
v.
11
12

UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE,
and UNITED STATES FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE,

13
Defendants.
14
15

SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES,
CROSS AND COUNTER-CLAIMS,

16
Defendant Intervenor.
/

17
18

CONSERVATION CONGRESS,
Plaintiff,

19

NO. CIV. S-12-2800 GEB/CKD
20
21
22
23

v.
UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE,
and UNITED STATES FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE,

NON-RELATED CASE ORDER

Defendants.
/

24
25

The court is in receipt of Plaintiff Conservation Congress's

26

notice of related cases, filed pursuant to Eastern District of
1

1

California Local Rule 123(b) (2012).

2

Plaintiff requests that the above-captioned case be related to

3

Conservation Congress v. United States Forest Service, et al.,

4

2:12-cv-02800-GEB-CKD.

5
6
7

Pl's Not., ECF No. 65.

Eastern District of California Local Rule 123(a) provides that
an action is related to another action when:
(1) both actions involve the same parties and are
based on the same or a similar claim;

8
9
10
11
12

(2) both actions involve
transaction, or event;

the

same

property,

(3) both actions involve similar questions of fact
and the same question of law and their assignment
to the same Judge or Magistrate Judge is likely to
effect a substantial savings of judicial effort,
either because the same result should follow in
both actions or otherwise; or

13
14
15
16

(4) for any other reasons, it would entail
substantial duplication of labor if the actions
were heard by different Judges or Magistrate
Judges.
Local Rule 123(a) (2012).

17

Plaintiff argues that, in both cases, it sues the same federal

18

defendants concerning timber sales on the Shasta-Trinity National

19

Forest, and that, in both cases, the federal defendants "failed to

20

adequate[ly] analyze the cumulative impacts of their respective

21

timber[]sales on the Northern Spotted Owl under the ESA and NEPA."

22

Pl's Not., ECF No. 65, at 2.

23

two timber sales at issues are "only approximately seven miles

24

apart and take place in the same Northern Spotted Owl designated

25

critical habitat unit" and that, in either case, "Conservation

26

Congress points to the other timber[]sale as an example of the type

Plaintiff further attests that the

2

1

of cumulative impact that it alleges the federal defendants have

2

failed to properly analyze."

3

Id.

The Defendants U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife

4

Service

(collectively,

5

separate actions are not related within the meaning of Local Rule

6

123(a) because the "two actions challenge two separate, unrelated

7

forest projects," which are "based upon different factual analyses,

8

supported by and recorded in different sets of decisional documents

9

and administrative records," and that the "respective records in

10

each of these cases likely consist of thousands of pages of

11

documents specific to each project."

Defs' Resp., ECF No. 66, at

12

2-3.

while

13

above-captioned case are based on Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered

14

Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, Plaintiff's

15

other action raises claims under Sections 7(d) and 9 of the

16

Endangered Species Act, and the National Forest Management Act.

Defendants

also

"Federal

assert

Defendants")

that,

the

argue

that

claims

in

the

the

17

On balance, the court finds that the above-captioned case is

18

not related to Conservation Congress v. United States Forest

19

Service, et al., 2:12-cv-02800-GEB-CKD, because each case requires

20

substantially

21

assignment to the same Judge is not likely to effect a substantial

22

savings of judicial effort.

different

factual

and

legal

analyses.

23

The court, therefore, DECLINES to relate the cases.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

DATED:

January 9, 2013.

26
3

Here,