Okinawa Dugong (Dugong Dugon) et al v. Rumsfeld et al

Filing 225

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 224 Requesting Stay of Briefing on Remedy filed by James N Mattis, U.S. Department of Defense. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 5/31/18. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/31/2018)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY;
TURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION
NETWORK; JAPAN ENVIRONMENTAL
LAWYERS FEDERATION; SAVE THE
DUGONG FOUNDATION; ANNA
SHIMABUKURO; TAKUMA
HIGASHIONNA; and YOSHIKAZU
MAKISHI,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
JAMES MATTIS, in his official capacity as the )
Secretary of Defense; and US Department of
)
Defense,
)
)
Defendants.
)

Civil Action No. 3:03-cv-4350 (EMC)
Hearing Date: June 28, 2018
Time: 1:30 pm
Courtroom: 5
JOINT STIPULATION REQUESTING
STAY OF BRIEFING ON REMEDY
(National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C.
§§ 470 et seq.)

13
14

1.

On March 9, 2018, the Court entered an Order adopting, with modifications, the

15

parties’ proposed briefing schedule in this matter. ECF No. 218. The proposed briefing schedule

16

submitted by the Parties did not address briefing on remedy.

17

2.

On April 28, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No.

18

221), on May 11, 2018, Defendants filed their Opposition and Cross-motion for Summary Judgment

19

(ECF No. 222), and on May 25, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their reply brief (ECF No. 223). Defendants’

20

reply brief is due on June 1, 2018.

21

3.

The parties’ respective opening briefs each referenced Plaintiffs’ request “to enjoin

22

DoD from taking actions in furtherance of the FRF project until DoD remedies the flaws in its

23

process,” but neither party included in its brief substantive arguments addressing Plaintiffs’

24

requested injunction.

25

4.

The parties have conferred and agree that it is in the best of interest of the efficient

26

disposition of this case for the parties to reserve further arguments on the appropriate remedy until

27

after this Court has ruled on the merits of Plaintiffs’ National Historic Preservation Act claim.

28

5.

The parties respectfully request that the Court defer consideration of Plaintiffs’

STIPULATION REQUESTING STAY OF REMEDY BRIEFING
CASE NO. 3:03-cv-4350-EMC
1

1

request for injunctive relief and that the Court order the parties to propose a separate briefing

2

schedule on the appropriate remedy, if Plaintiffs prevail on their Motion for Summary Judgment.

3

Dated: May 31, 2018.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Sarah Burt (by consent, TNF)
SARAH H. BURT (CA Bar # 250378)
J. MARTIN WAGNER (CA Bar # 190049)
Earthjustice
50 California Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity, et al.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

JEFFREY H. WOOD
Acting Assistant Attorney
Environment and Natural Resources Division General
/s/ Taylor Ferrell
PETER KRYN DYKEMA (D.C. Bar # 419349)
TAYLOR N FERRELL (D.C. Bar # 498260)
Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice Environment and
Natural Resources Section
601 D Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20004
Dykema Tel.: [phone]
Ferrell Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Counsel for Federal Defendants

23
24

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED this _____ day of ______________, 2018
31st
May

25
S DISTRIC

R NIA

dward M

. Chen

RT

FO

NO

Judge E

LI

28

United ORDERED
O States District
IT IS S

H

STIPULATION REQUESTING STAY OF REMEDY BRIEFING
ER
C
N2
F
CASE NO. 3:03-cv-4350-EMC
DI
TO
A

27

UNIT
ED

S

RT
U
O

TC
TE
_________________________________________
TA

26

S T RIC

Judge Hon. Edward M. Chen