People of the State of California, ex rel. et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al

Filing 79

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE to Plaintiffs. Show Cause Response due by 1/4/2016. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 12/9/2015. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/9/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, EX REL., et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8

10
11

ORDER TO SHOW TO CAUSE
Re: Dkt. No. 75

v.

9

Case No. 02-cv-04621-KAW

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, et al.,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13
On September 18, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to dissolve the injunction issued on

14
15

April 28, 2003, which enjoined Defendants, along with Intervenor-Defendant the Town of

16

Mammoth Lakes, “from commencing any construction or other work on the [Mammoth Yosemite]

17

airport expansion project pending conformance with all NEPA requirements, including completion

18

and adoption of an Environmental Impact Statement.” (Defs.’ Mot., Dkt. No. 75 at 1.)
Defendants contend that they conferred with Plaintiffs’ counsel, and were advised that

19
20

Plaintiffs would likely not take a position on this motion. Id. Notwithstanding, pursuant to Civil

21

Local Rule 7-3, Plaintiffs’ opposition was due on October 2, 2015. Plaintiff did not file an

22

opposition or a statement of non-opposition as required by the Civil Local Rules. See Civil L.R. 7-

23

3(b).

24

Accordingly, by no later than January 4, 2016, the Court orders Plaintiffs to file either (1)

25

a statement of non-opposition to the motion to dissolve the injunction, or (2) show cause why the

26

motion should not be granted as unopposed and file an opposition to the motion to dissolve the

27

injunction. Failure to timely file may result in the dissolution of the injunction. See Judge

28

Westmore’s General Standing Order ¶ 22 (“The failure of the opposing party to file a

1

memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to any motion shall constitute consent to the

2

granting of the motion”).

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 9, 2015
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate 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