The Sierra Club et al v. United States Environmental Protection Agency
Filing
68
ORDER RE SEVENTH CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT: SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO BE FILED BY 10/8/2013. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 9/24/2013. (mejlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/24/2013) Modified on 9/24/2013 (mejlc2, COURT STAFF).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
David A. Bahr (Oregon Bar No. 90199)
Bahr Law Offices, P.C.
1035 ½ Monroe Street
Eugene, OR 97402
(541) 556-6439
davebahr@mindspring.com
Elena Saxonhouse (California Bar. No. 235139)
Sierra Club Environmental Law Program
85 Second St., 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 977-5765
(415) 977-5793 (facsimile)
Elena.Saxonhouse@Sierraclub.org
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MELINDA HAAG (CSBN 132612)
United States Attorney
ALEX TSE (CSBN 152348)
Acting Chief, Civil Division
ABRAHAM A. SIMMONS (CSBN 146400)
Assistant United States Attorney
450 Golden Gate Avenue, 9th Floor
San Francisco, California 94102-3495
Telephone:
(415) 436-7264
Facsimile:
(415) 436-6748
Email: abraham.simmons@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Federal Defendant
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
19
20
21
Case No. C-11-0846-MEJ
THE SIERRA CLUB and ENVIRONMENTAL
22 INTEGRITY PROJECT,
24
SEVENTH SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CASE
MANAGEMENT REPORT, NOTICE OF
SETTLEMENT IN PRINCIPLE AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Plaintiffs,
23
vs.
25 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
26
Defendant.
27
28
Seventh Supplemental Joint Case Management Report, Notice Of Settlement In Principle and [Proposed] Order - 11-846 MEJ
1
BAHR LAW OFFICES, P.C.
1035 ½ Monroe Street
Eugene, OR 97402
(541) 556-6439
This is an action brought by Plaintiffs pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. §
1
2
552, to compel production of documents. After protracted settlement discussions and requests for addi-
3
tional time from this Court, as outlined in the Sixth Supplemental Joint Case Management Report, Dkt.
4
No. 65, on August 7, 2013, the Parties reported that they desired additional time to explore settlement of
5
this case. Id. Accordingly, the Court set September 4, 2013 as a deadline for the parties to report their
6
progress in this regard. Dkt. No. 66. The Parties apologize to the Court that they did not submit this re-
7
port by September 4, 2013 as they were in the midst of a flurry of end-stage settlement negotiations and
8
did not want to report back either that they had failed to settle the case or were seeking yet another ex-
9
tension for negotiations.
The Parties can now inform the Court that they have agreed in principle on settlement terms re-
10
11
solving this dispute but require additional time for formal approval. Accordingly, they seek an additional
12
three weeks, until October 8, 2013, in which to file a Settlement Agreement with the Court.
Respectfully submitted for the Court’s consideration, this 19th day of September, 2013.
13
14
MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney
15
__s/ David Bahr__________________
David Bahr (Oregon Bar No. 901990)
Bahr Law Offices, P.C.
1035 ½ Monroe Street
16
17
18
_s/ Abraham Simmons _____
ABRAHAM SIMMONS
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Federal Defendant
19
[PROPOSED] ORDER
20
This matter having come before the Court upon the Parties’ Seventh Joint Case Status Report,
21
and good cause appearing;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Parties shall file a Settlement Agreement by October 8,
24
2013.
S
24
Dated this _____ day of September, 2013.
TED
GRAN
_________________________________
JUDGE MARIA-ELENA JAMES
na James
aria-Ele
UNITED STATESMDISTRICT COURT
Judge
R NIA
ER
H
Seventh Supplemental Joint Case Management Report, Notice Of Settlement In Principle and [Proposed] Order - 11-846 MEJ
FO
RT
28
NO
27
UNIT
ED
26
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
25
LI
23
Notice Of Settlement In Principle and proposed order, and the Court being fully advised in the premises
2
A
22
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
BAHR LAW OFFICES, P.C.
1035 ½ Monroe Street
Eugene, OR 97402
(541) 556-6439
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?