Association of American Railroads et al v. California Office of Spill Prevention and Response et al

Filing 19

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/3/14. The hearing for the 6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is reset for 1/15/2015 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Defendants opposition due on or before 12/5/14. (Manzer, C)

1
2
3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7
8

ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN
RAILROADS, UNION PACIFIC
RAILROAD COMPANY AND BNSF
RAILWAY COMPANY,

ORDER RE: STIPULATION RE
SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
Plaintiffs, INJUNCTION

9
v.

10
11
12
13
14
15

Case No. 2:14CV02354

CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF SPILL
PREVENTION AND RESPONSE,
THOMAS M. CULLEN, JR.,
CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATOR FOR
OIL SPILL RESPONSE, in his official
capacity, AND KAMALA D. HARRIS,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, in her official capacity,
Defendants.

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

Plaintiffs ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS, UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
COMPANY, and BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY (collectively, Plaintiffs) and defendants
CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF SPILL PREVENTION AND RESPONSE (OSPR), THOMAS M.
CULLEN, JR., CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATOR FOR OIL SPILL RESPONSE, in his official
capacity, and KAMALA D. HARRIS, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, in her official capacity (collectively, Defendants), by and through their counsel of
record, enter into the stipulation below based upon the following facts:
1.

On October 7, 2014, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory

Relief containing claims and allegations about Senate Bill 861 (S.B. 861).
2.

On October 10, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PI

Motion).

1

1

3.

The hearing on the PI Motion is currently set for November 20, 2014.

2

4.

On October 22, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief from Page

3
4

Limitation Requirement for the PI Motion.
5.

Defendants’ counsel contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel regarding a stipulation to postpone

5

the hearing on the PI Motion due to administrative issues and to extend the page limit for

6

Defendants’ opposition to the PI Motion.

7

6.

Plaintiffs’ counsel responded that a stipulation to postpone the hearing on the PI

8

motion could be reached, provided that Defendants agreed not to issue, on an emergency basis or

9

otherwise, or send to the California Office of Administrative Law, any regulation or order

10

implementing the portions of S.B. 861 concerning or affecting railroads, before the postponed

11

hearing date.

12

7.

Defendants’ counsel so agreed.

13

8.

The parties have thus met and conferred and have stipulated, subject to the Court’s

14

approval, to reschedule the currently scheduled November 20, 2014 hearing on the PI Motion to

15

January 15, 2015 at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court is available, to revise the PI

16

Motion’s briefing schedule as set forth below, to extend the page limit on Defendants’ opposition

17

to the PI Motion to 35 pages, and to extend the page limit on Plaintiffs’ reply brief regarding the

18

PI motion to 25 pages, on the condition that Defendants refrain from issuing, on an emergency

19

basis or otherwise, or sending to the California Office of Administrative Law, any regulation or

20

order implementing any portion of S.B. 861 concerning or affecting railroads, before the Court

21

holds a hearing on the PI motion or January 31, 2015, whichever is earlier.

22

STIPULATION

23

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED therefore, by and between the parties to this action, through

24

their respective counsel of record, subject to court order, that Plaintiffs’ PI Motion will be subject

25

to the following schedule:

26
27

1.

The November 20, 2014 PI Motion hearing will be rescheduled to January 15, 2015 at

2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court is available.

28
2

1

2.

Defendants shall file their opposition to the PI Motion on or before December 5,

2

2014. Defendants’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to the PI Motion shall

3

not exceed 35 pages in length.

4
5

3.

Plaintiffs’ reply to the PI Motion is to be filed on or before December 19, 2014. The

reply shall not exceed 25 pages in length.

6

4.

The administrator of oil spill response will not issue any new S.B. 861 regulation

7

concerning or affecting railroads, see Cal. Gov. Code § 8670.7.5, or send any new S.B. 861

8

regulation concerning or affecting railroads to the California Office of Administrative Law

9

(OAL), before the rescheduled January 15, 2015 PI Motion hearing, or, if the PI Motion hearing

10

is not held on January 15, 2015, then before the date that the PI Motion hearing is held or January

11

31, 2015, whichever is earlier. In the event that no PI Motion hearing has been held by January

12

31, 2015, Plaintiffs reserve the right to seek a temporary restraining order to enjoin enforcement

13

of any new S.B. 861 regulation concerning or affecting railroads issued on or after January 31,

14

2015.

15

ORDER

16

Based on the foregoing Stipulation and recitals, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary

17

Injunction (PI Motion) shall be heard on January 15, 2015 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 2 on the

18

15th Floor; Defendants shall file their opposition to the PI Motion on or before December 5,

19

2014. Plaintiffs shall file their reply to the opposition to the PI Motion on or before December

20

19, 2014. Finally, the parties also stipulated to the following page extensions: “Defendants’

21

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to the PI Motion shall not exceed 35 pages

22

in length. [Plaintiff’s] reply shall not exceed 25 pages in length.” The Court finds such sizeable

23

extensions to be unnecessary. Accordingly, the Court will allow Defendants 27 pages to oppose

24

Plaintiff’s PI Motion (which is the same extension that the Court allowed Plaintiffs) and

25

Plaintiff’s reply shall not exceed 20 pages.

26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

Dated: November 3, 2014
3