Hopland Band of Pomo Indians et al v. Salazar et al

Filing 19

ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 18 Stipulation. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/21/2012)

Case3:12-cv-00556-CRB Document18 Filed05/14/12 Page1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

LESTER J. MARSTON
RAPPORT AND MARSTON
405 West Perkins Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiffs
STUART F. DELERY
Acting Assistant Attorney General
JOHN R. GRIFFITHS
Assistant Branch Director
JAMES D. TODD, JR.
Senior Counsel
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
CIVIL DIVISION
FEDERAL PROGRAMS BRANCH
20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

HOPLAND BAND OF POMO INDIANS, )
et al.,
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
KEN SALAZAR, Secretary of the Interior, )
)
et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )

Case No. 3:12CV556-CRB
Hon. Charles R. Breyer
Courtroom: N/A
Hearing: N/A
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
TO INCREASE PAGE LIMITS
ASSOCIATED WITH DEFENDANTS’
ANTICIPATED MOTION TO DISMISS

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-4(b) and 7-12, and for good cause shown, the parties stipulate

23

and request that this Court increase the page limits on motions set by ¶ 5 of its Standing Orders.

24

See ECF No. 13-2. In support of this stipulation, the parties state as follows:

25

1. Plaintiffs’ complaint raises separate allegations about five federally-recognized Indian

26

tribes. See Compl., ECF No. 1, ¶¶ 24-52. Additionally, plaintiffs’ complaint brings

27

nine separate causes of action against defendants, arising under the: (i) Indian Self-

28

Stip. and Proposed Order to Increase
Page Limits, No. 3:12CV556-CRB

Case3:12-cv-00556-CRB Document18 Filed05/14/12 Page2 of 4

1

Determination and Education Assistance Act (“ISDA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 450 et

2

seq.; (ii) Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 553 & 702; (iii) equal

3

protection component of the Fifth Amendment; and (iv) Indian Trust doctrine. See

4

Compl. ¶¶ 55-113.

5

2. Pursuant to a stipulation with proposed order, defendants’ response to plaintiffs’

6

complaint is due May 23, 2012. See ECF No. 14. In addition to filing an answer to

7

some of plaintiffs’ complaint, defendants anticipate moving to dismiss some plaintiffs

8

and to dismiss several causes of action of the remaining plaintiffs.

9

3. This Court’s Standing Orders limits non-summary judgment motions to 15 pages in

10

length, exclusive of title pages, indexes of cases, table of contents, exhibits, affidavits,

11

and summaries of argument, if required. See ECF No. 13-2, ¶ 5. The Civil Local

12

Rules limit briefs or memoranda of points and authorities to no more than 25 pages in

13

length but allow parties to request the Court to increase the page limits. See Civil L.R.

14

7-4(b).

15

4. In light of the factual and legal complexity of each of the five plaintiff’s allegations

16

and their nine causes of action, and in order to give the parties the ability to

17

adequately support each of their arguments in support of (or in opposition to)

18

defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss, the parties respectfully request that this

19

Court allow defendants to file a memorandum in support of their motion and

20

plaintiffs to file a memorandum in support of their opposition up to 25 page in length,

21

exclusive of title pages, indexes of cases, table of contents, exhibits, affidavits, and

22

summaries of argument. See Civil L.R. 7-4(b). The parties believe that this increase

23

will promote judicial economy.

24

Accordingly, for good cause shown, this Court should grant the parties’ request to file

25

memoranda associated with defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss of up to 25 pages in

26

length, exclusive of title pages, indexes of cases, table of contents, exhibits, affidavits, and

27

summaries of argument, if required.

28

2
Stip. and Proposed Order to Increase
Page Limits, No. 3:12CV556-CRB

Case3:12-cv-00556-CRB Document18 Filed05/14/12 Page3 of 4

Respectfully Submitted,
1

s/ Lester J. Marston
LESTER J. MARSTON
RAPPORT AND MARSTON
Attorney for Plaintiffs

2
3
4

s/ James D. Todd, Jr.
JAMES D. TODD, JR.
Senior Counsel
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney for Defendants

5
6
7
8

Dated: May 14, 2012

9

R NIA

S

ER

H

17

___________________
Charles R. BreyerBreyer
les R.
United udge Char
J States District Judge

FO

RT

16

Dated: _5/21/2012___________

NO

15

C

LI

14

UNIT
ED

13

TA

RT
U
O

11
12

DISTR

IC
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SOES
T ORDERED. T

A

10

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
Stip. and Proposed Order to Increase
Page Limits, No. 3:12CV556-CRB

Case3:12-cv-00556-CRB Document18 Filed05/14/12 Page4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

1
2

I, James D. Todd, Jr., hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was this date

3

served upon all counsel of record by electronically filing the foregoing with the Clerk of the U.S.

4

District Court for the Northern District of California, using its ECF system, which automatically

5

provides electronic notification to the following:

6
7
8
9

LESTER J. MARSTON
RAPPORT AND MARSTON
405 West Perkins Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
[e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiffs

10

/s/ James D. Todd, Jr.
JAMES D. TODD, JR.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
Stip. and Proposed Order to Increase
Page Limits, No. 3:12CV556-CRB