Conservation Congress et al v. Finley et al

Filing 59

Order by Hon. Samuel Conti denying 47 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages.(sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/4/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 CONSERVATION CONGRESS, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CENTER, 6 Plaintiffs, 7 v. 8 10 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 9 NANCY FINLEY, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, TYRONE KELLEY, and UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, 11 Defendants. 12 ) Case No. 11-4752-SC ) ) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ) LEAVE TO FILE EXCESS PAGES ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 13 Now before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Leave to File 14 Excess Pages. ECF No. 47 ("Mot."). For the reasons set forth 15 below, the Motion is DENIED. 16 On November 16, 2011, the Court set a briefing schedule in 17 this matter, providing that each party's summary judgment briefing 18 shall not exceed a total of seventy-five pages. ECF No. 14 19 ("Briefing Order"). Plaintiffs complied with the Briefing Order, 20 filing a forty-five-page motion on April 2, 2012 and a thirty-page 21 response on May 22, 2012. ECF Nos. 37, 44. Defendants have not 22 complied. They filed a fifty-page cross-motion on May 11, 2012 and 23 a thirty-five-page response brief on May 31, 2012, exceeding their 24 page limit by ten pages. ECF Nos. 41, 51. About three hours 25 before Defendants filed their reply brief, they filed the Motion 26 for Leave to File Excess Pages. Plaintiffs filed an opposition to 27 the Motion that same day. 28 ECF No. 52. 1 As Plaintiffs point out, Defendants' Motion is inconsistent 2 with Local Civil Rule 7-4(b), which requires that such motions be 3 filed "prior to the due date." 4 unfairly disadvantage Plaintiffs, who have complied with the 5 Court's Briefing Order. 6 Further, Defendants' actions could Accordingly, Defendants' Motion is DENIED. By June 6, 2012, 7 Defendants shall file a revised version of their reply brief which 8 complies with the page limits set forth in the Court's Briefing 9 Order. If Defendants elect not to do so, the Court will review the United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 brief they filed on May 31, 2012, but will ignore the last ten 11 pages of that brief, i.e., that portion of the brief which exceeds 12 the page limits set forth in the Briefing Order. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 17 Dated: June 4, 2012 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?