Western Watersheds Project et al v. U.S. Forest Service
Filing
170
STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 11/9/12. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/9/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
JEFFREY R. CHANIN (CSB # 103649)
WARREN A. BRAUNIG (CSB # 243884)
KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP
710 Sansome Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
(415) 391-5400
Facsimile:
(415) 397-7188
Email: jchanin@kvn.com
wbraunig@kvn.com
LAUREN M. RULE (ISB # 6863), pro hac vice
ADVOCATES FOR THE WEST
P.O. Box 1612
Boise, ID 83701
Telephone:
(208) 342-7024
Facsimile:
(208) 342-8286
Email: lrule@advocateswest.org
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
OAKLAND DIVISION
15
16
17
18
19
WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT;
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE
COUNCIL; CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY; CALIFORNIA TROUT;
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
INFORMATION CENTER; KLAMATH
SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER; and
SIERRA FOREST LEGACY,
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
418494.01
Plaintiffs,
vs.
U.S. FOREST SERVICE,
Defendant.
) Case No.: C 08-01460 PJH
)
)
)
) STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
Case No. C-08-01460-PJH
1
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), Plaintiffs Western Watersheds Project, et al. and
2
Federal Defendant United States Forest Service hereby voluntarily dismiss the remaining claims
3
in this action from Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint (ECF No. 103). Plaintiffs’ Third
4
Amended Complaint challenged ten categorical exclusion (“CE”) decisions covering authoriza-
5
tion of livestock grazing. Those CE decisions were the following:
6
Klamath National Forest
7
Little North Fork CE; Shelly Meadows CE; Big Ridge CE; Big Meadows CE;
8
Modoc National Forest
9
Mount Dome CE; Beaver Dam, East Grizzlie, Timbered Mountain, and Surveyors Valley
10
CE;
11
Mendocino National Forest
12
Pine Mountain, York Cabin, Middle Creek and Elk Mountain CE;
13
Lassen National Forest
14
Deer Creek and Lyonsville CE; Champs Flat, Gooch Valley, Lower Pine Creek, and
15
North Eagle Lake CE;
16
Inyo National Forest
17
Tunawee, Ash Creek, Alabama Hills, and George Creek CE.
18
Subsequently, the Forest Service withdrew the two Modoc and the Inyo CE decisions.
19
See ECF No. 117, at 1.
20
The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment as to two CE decisions: the Big
21
Ridge CE on the Klamath National Forest and the Pine Mountain, York Cabin, Middle Creek
22
and Elk Mountain CE on the Mendocino National Forest (ECF No. 136; ECF No. 147).
23
On March 30, 2012, the Court issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part
24
Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 159). The Court held the conclusions reached by the
25
Forest Service in connection with the Big Ridge CE and Mendocino CE decision memos were
26
arbitrary and capricious in certain respects and failed to take the “hard look” required by NEPA.
27
The Forest Service has subsequently acknowledged that, pursuant to the Court’s
28
Summary Judgment Order, the Big Ridge and Mendocino CE Decision Memos are set aside, and
1
418494.01
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
Case No.: C 08-01460 PJH
1
has notified Plaintiffs that, as of October 23, 2012, the Big Ridge allotment on the Klamath
2
National Forest and the Pine Mountain, York Cabin, Middle Creek and Elk Mountain allotments
3
on the Mendocino National Forest are currently scheduled for environmental analysis under
4
NEPA during the 2014-2016 review period.
5
Of the remaining CEs challenged in Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint, the Forest
6
Service has also notified Plaintiffs that it has withdrawn the Little North Fork, Shelly Meadows,
7
and Big Meadows CE decisions on the Klamath National Forest and the Champs Flat, Gooch
8
Valley, Lower Pine Creek, and North Eagle Lake CE decision on the Lassen National Forest. As
9
of October 23, 2012, these allotments are currently scheduled for environmental analysis under
10
NEPA during the 2014-2016 review period.
11
Plaintiffs hereby dismiss with prejudice their claims against the one outstanding CE
12
decision from their Third Amended Complaint: the Deer Creek and Lyonsville CE from the
13
Lassen National Forest.
14
Pursuant to these actions by Defendant Forest Service and Plaintiffs, all of the remaining
15
claims in Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint are resolved.
16
Defendant Forest Service stipulate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) that this case may be dismissed
17
with prejudice, in accordance with the accompanying judgment.
18
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
FOR PLAINTIFFS
19
20
21
22
23
24
Dated: November 8, 2012
/s/Warren A. Braunig
JEFFREY R. CHANIN
WARREN A. BRAUNIG
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
633 Battery St.
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone:
(415) 391-5400
Facsimile:
(415) 397-7188
Email: wbraunig@kvn.com
25
26
27
28
2
418494.01
Therefore, Plaintiffs and
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
Case No.: C 08-01460 PJH
/s/Lauren M. Rule
LAUREN M. RULE
ADVOCATES FOR THE WEST
P.O. Box 1612
Boise, Idaho 83701
Telephone:
(208) 342-7024
Facsimile:
(208) 342-8286
Email: lru1e@advocateswest.org
1
2
3
4
5
FOR FEDERAL DEFENDANT
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Dated: November 8, 2012
IGNACIA S. MORENO
Assistant Attorney General
Environment & Natural Resources Division
/s/David B. Glazer
DAVID B. GLAZER
Natural Resources Section
Environment & Natural Resources Division
United States Department of Justice
301 Howard Street, Suite 1050
San Francisco, California 94105
Tel: (415) 744-6491
Fax: (415) 744-6476
E-mail: David.Glazer@usdoj.gov
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
418494.01
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
Case No.: C 08-01460 PJH
1
S DISTRIC
11/9/12
Dated:_________________
RT
ER
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
Case No.: C 08-01460 PJH
R NIA
Judge Ph
H
8
amilton
yllis J. H
NO
7
FO
6
418494.01
RT
U
O
TC
TE
______________________
TA
HON. PHYLLISRDERED
J. HAMILTON
OO
IT IS S
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
LI
5
IT IS SO ORDERED
A
4
approves the Parties’ Stipulation of Dismissal.
S
3
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court hereby
UNIT
ED
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
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?