Drakes Bay Oyster Company et al v. Salazar et al

Filing 122

ORDER re STIPULATION AND ORDER re 121 Joint Case Management Statement filed by U.S. Department of the Interior, Kevin Lunny, Drakes Bay Oyster Company. Case Management Conference set for 3/3/2014 is CONTINUED to Monday, 7/7/2014 02:00 PM before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Courtroom 1, 4th Floor, Oakland. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 2/26/2014. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/26/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

John Briscoe [CSBN 53223]
Lawrence S. Bazel [CSBN 114641]
Peter S. Prows [CSBN 257819]
BRISCOE IVESTER & BAZEL LLP
155 Sansome Street, Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]

6
7
8
9

Ryan R. Waterman [CSBN 229485]
STOEL RIVES LLP
12255 El Camino Real, Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92130
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

10

13

Zachary Walton
 [CSBN 181041]
SSL LAW FIRM LLP

575 Market Street, Suite 2700
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: [phone]

Email: 
[e-mail]

14

Attorneys for Plaintiffs DRAKES BAY OYSTER COMPANY and KEVIN LUNNY

11
12

15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

16
17
18

DRAKES BAY OYSTER COMPANY et al.
Plaintiffs,

19
20
21
22

v.

Case No. 12-cv-06134-YGR
JOINT STATUS UPDATE;
STIPULATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER

S.M.R. JEWELL, in her official capacity as
Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, et al.
Date: March 3, 2014
Defendants.

23

Time: 2:00 p.m.

24

Court: Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers,
Oakland Courthouse 5 – 2nd Floor

25
26
27
28
JOINT STATUS UPDATE; STIPULATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER; 12-CV-06134 YGR

1
2
3

JOINT STATUS UPDATE
On February 4, 2013, this Court issued an Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Preliminary Injunction (Doc. #89).

4

On February 6, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal from that Order (Doc. #90).

5

On February 25, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an Order, inter alia, granting

6
7
8
9

Plaintiffs an injunction pending appeal and expediting the calendaring of that appeal.
On September 3, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion affirming this
Court’s Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
On September 30, this Court entered an Order (Doc. #113), inter alia, staying Defendants’

10

response to the Amended Complaint (Doc. #44) pending the filing by Plaintiffs of a Second

11

Amended Complaint, and giving Plaintiffs until not more than 28 days following the issuance of

12

the mandate by the Ninth Circuit to file a Second Amended Complaint.

13

On October 18, Plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing en banc in the Ninth Circuit.

14

On November 12, this Court entered an Order (Doc. #117) that provided in pertinent part:

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

If the Ninth Circuit has not ruled on Plaintiffs’ petition for
rehearing en banc by five (5) business days prior to March 3, the
parties shall submit a joint status update so informing the Court.
The parties may also contact the Courtroom Deputy to advance the
Case Management Conference date, if necessary.
On January 14, 2014, the Ninth Circuit issued an Order, inter alia, denying Plaintiffs’
petition for rehearing en banc.
On January 27, the Ninth Circuit issued an Order granting Plaintiffs’ motion to stay the
issuance of the mandate for 90 days pending the filing and disposition of a petition for writ of
certiorari with the United States Supreme Court.
Rule 41(d)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that if a party files
a petition for writ of certiorari, and so notifies the circuit clerk in writing, within the period of the
stay of the mandate, then “the stay continues until the Supreme Court’s final disposition.”

26
27
28
-1-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE; STIPULATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER; 12-CV-06134 YGR

1

STIPULATION

2

Having met and conferred through counsel by telephone, Plaintiffs and Defendants

3

stipulate that the Court should enter an order continuing the Case Management Conference

4

currently scheduled for March 3, 2014 to a date and time of this Court’s convenience following

5

the issuance of the mandate by the Ninth Circuit. If the mandate has not issued by five (5)

6

business days prior to the continued conference, the parties shall submit a joint status update by

7

that date so informing the Court.

8
9

Accordingly, Plaintiffs and Defendants respectfully request that the Court approve this
stipulation by entering the Order proposed below.

10
11

Respectfully submitted this 24th day of February, 2014.

12
13
14
15
16

MELINDA L. HAAG (CSBN 132612)
United States Attorney
ALEX G. TSE (CSBN 152348)
Chief, Civil Division
ROBERT G. DREHER
Acting Assistant Attorney General

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

By: /s/ Stephen M. Macfarlane (per authorization)
STEPHEN M. MACFARLANE (N.Y. Bar No.
2456440)
Senior Attorney
JOSEPH T. MATHEWS (Colo. Bar No. 42865)
E. BARRETT ATWOOD (D.C. Bar. No. 478539)
Trial Attorneys
Attorneys for Defendants

24
25
26
27
28
-2-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE; STIPULATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER; 12-CV-06134 YGR

1
2

BRISCOE IVESTER & BAZEL LLP

3
4
5

By: /s/ Peter Prows
PETER PROWS
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE; STIPULATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER; 12-CV-06134 YGR

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

Good cause having been shown, the Stipulation is APPROVED. The Case Management

3

Conference previously scheduled for March 3, 2014 is continued to July 7, 2014 at 2:00 p.m., in

4

Courtroom 1. If the Ninth Circuit has not issued its mandate prior to five (5) business days prior

5

to the continued conference, the parties shall submit a joint status update so informing the Court.

6

The parties may also contact the Courtroom Deputy to advance the Case Management Conference

7

date, if necessary.

8
9
10

Dated: February 26, 2014
HONORABLE YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE; STIPULATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER; 12-CV-06134 YGR