Karuk Tribe et al v. Stelle et al

Filing 59

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR STAY OF ORDER DENYING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. The Court having considered the parties' respective writt en submissions and the arguments of counsel at the hearing, and for the reasons stated by the Court on the record, the motion for a temporary restraining order and motion for a preliminary injunction are denied. Additionally, plaintiffs' oral motion for a stay of said ruling is denied. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on April 25, 2016. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2016)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KARUK TRIBE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8
v.

9
10

WILLIAM STELLE, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
and

12
13

Case No. 16-cv-01079-MMC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS'
MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER AND
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION;
DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR
STAY OF ORDER DENYING
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Re: Dkt. No. 36

SISKIYOU COUNTY, et al.,
Defendant-Intervenors.

14
15
16
17

Before the Court is plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, filed April

18

18, 2016.1 The matter came on regularly for hearing on today’s date. Susan Jane M.

19

Brown and Peter M. K. Frost of the Western Environmental Law Center appeared on

20

behalf of plaintiffs. S. Derek Shugert, Bradley H. Oliphant, and David B. Glazer of the

21

U.S. Department of Justice appeared on behalf of defendants. Julie A. Weis of Haglund

22

Kelley LLP appeared on behalf of defendant-intervenors.

23

The Court having considered the parties’ respective written submissions and the

24

arguments of counsel at the hearing, and for the reasons stated by the Court on the

25

record, the motion for a temporary restraining order and motion for a preliminary

26
1

27
28

At the close of the below-referenced hearing, the Court granted plaintiffs’
unopposed oral request that the matter also be treated as a motion for a preliminary
injunction.

1

injunction are hereby DENIED. Additionally, plaintiffs’ oral motion for a stay of said ruling

2

is hereby DENIED.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 25, 2016
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2