High Sierra Hikers Association v. United States Department of the Interior et al

Filing 137

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO REVISE BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 12/4/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

MELINDA L. HAAG (CSBN 132612)
United States Attorney
ALEX TSE (CSBN 152348)
Acting Chief, Civil Division
MICHAEL T. PYLE (CSBN 172954)
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Northern District of California
150 Almaden Blvd., Suite 900
San Jose, CA 95113
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]

7

13

IGNACIA S. MORENO
Assistant Attorney General
Environment and Natural Resources Division
CHARLES R. SHOCKEY (D.C. Bar No. 914879)
Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice
Environment and Natural Resources Division
Natural Resources Section
501 “I” Street, Suite 9-700
Sacramento, CA 95814-2322
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
916-930-2210
Email:
[e-mail]

14

Attorneys for Defendants

8
9
10
11
12

15
16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18
19

HIGH SIERRA HIKERS ASSOCIATION,

20
21
22

Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR, et al.,

Case No.

CV-09-4621-RS

J OINT STIPULATION TO
REVISE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
AND PROPOSED ORDER
J UDGE: HONORABLE
RICHARD SEEBORG

23
Defendants.
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION -- Case No.CV-09-4621-RS

Courtroom: 3, 17th Floor

1
2
3

WHEREAS, on October 26, 2012, the Plaintiff High Sierra Hikers Association filed a
Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Other Expenses Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412,

4

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants United States of the Interior, et al., have been

5

engaged in settlement discussions with respect to the Plaintiff’s motion and are interested in

6

continuing settlement discussions that, if successful, would avoid the need for a hearing;

7
8

WHEREAS, at Defendants’ request, the Court previously continued the date for the
Defendants to file their opposition to the fee motion until December 11, 2012;

9

WHEREAS, the parties now have reached an agreement-in-principle regarding a possible

10

settlement of the Plaintiff’s motion, but require additional time to reach agreement on the specific

11

terms and conditions of the proposed settlement, as well as time for formal approval by officials

12

in the Department of the Interior and Department of Justice,

13

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed between the Parties that:

14

1. The date for the Defendants’ to file their opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion shall be

15

continued by an additional 30 days, until January 10, 2013, to allow time for further settlement

16

discussions and review of any settlement agreement by both parties.

17
18
19

2. The parties shall advise the Court of the status their settlement discussions in a joint
status report to be filed on or before January 4, 2013.
3. The hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion is continued until a date to be set following the joint

20

status report on January 4, 2013. If settlement does not appear imminent at that time, the parties

21

will agree on a date for the Plaintiff’s Reply and request a hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion at the

22

next available date on the Court’s calendar.

23

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION -- Case No. CV-09-4621-RS

1

1
2
3

In addition to stipulating to the above, I, Charles R. Shockey, attest that concurrence in the
filing of this Stipulation has been obtained from Barbara N. Barath, Attorney for Plaintiff.

4
5

Dated: December 4, 2012

BARBARA N. BARATH
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

6

By:
/s/ Barbara Barath [as authorized]
Barbara Barath, Attorney for Plaintiff

7
8

Dated: December 4, 2012

CHARLES R. SHOCKEY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

9

By:
/s/ Charles R. Shockey
Charles R. Shockey, Attorney for Defendants

10

[PROPOSED] ORDER
11
12
13
14

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS
SO ORDERED.
BY:
12/4/12
Dated: ______________________
HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION -- Case No. CV-09-4621-RS

2