Los Padres Forestwatch v. United States Forest Service et al

Filing 60

STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE PURSUANT TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. The Clerk shall close the file. Motions terminated: 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Koh on 4/18/2011. (lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/18/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Michael W. Graf (CA Bar # 136172)
227 Behrens Street
El Cerrito CA 94530
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Sharon E. Duggan (CA Bar # 105108)
370 Grand Avenue Suite 5
Oakland, CA 94610
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

IGNACIA S. MORENO
Assistant Attorney General
PETER C. WHITFIELD (HI Bar No. 08749)
U.S. Department of Justice
Environment and Natural Resources Division
P.O. Box 663
Washington, DC 20044-0663
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION
LOS PADRES FORESTWATCH, a non-profit
organization,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE,
PEGGY HERNANDEZ, in her official
capacity as Forest Supervisor for the Los
Padres National Forest,
Defendants.

Case No. C 10-03653
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Honorable Lucy H. Koh (LHK)

Plaintiff Los Padres ForestWatch and Defendants United States Forest Service and Peggy

1
2

Hernandez (together the “Forest Service”), by and through their undersigned counsel of record,

3

hereby aver as follows:

4

WHEREAS, on August 18, 2010, Plaintiff filed a Complaint for Declaratory and

5

Injunctive Relief alleging that the Forest Service, in approving a road brushing project, had failed

6

to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”);

7
8

WHEREAS, on August 13, 2010, Plaintiff submitted a sixty-day Notice of Intent to Sue
letter to the Forest Service under the federal Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), 16 U.S.C. §

9
1536(a)(2), informing it of Plaintiff’s intent to amend its complaint to add a claim under the ESA
10
11
12

for failure to consult with the federal wildlife agencies on the effects of the Project and other
road maintenance activities on threatened and endangered plants and wildlife;
WHEREAS, the parties, through their authorized representatives, have reached

13
14

agreement on the terms of a settlement (“Settlement Agreement”), attached hereto as Exhibit A,

15

which they consider to be a just, fair, adequate, and equitable resolution of the issues in this case;
Accordingly, the parties do hereby stipulate as follows:

16
17

1.

18

Agreement becomes effective upon an order of this Court dismissing the Plaintiff’s claims with

19

prejudice.

20

2.

21

See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994).

22

Dated: April 11, 2011

23

/s/ Michael W. Graf
Michael W. Graf
Sharon E. Duggan
Attorneys for Plaintiff

24
25

The Agreement resolves all the Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants in this case. The

The Court retains jurisdiction over this matter to oversee compliance with the Agreement.

IGNACIA MORENO
Assistant Attorney General
Environment and Natural Resources Division
/s/Peter C. Whitfield
Peter C. Whitfield,
United States Department of Justice
Attorneys for Defendants

26
27
28
2

1
2
3
4

ORDER
The above-captioned case is dismissed with prejudice, except that the Court retains
jurisdiction over this matter to oversee compliance with the Agreement. See Kokkonen v.
Guardian Life Insur. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994).1

5
6
7

The Clerk shall close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

Dated: April 18, 2011

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
1

24
25
26
27
28

The Court finds that the parties’ agreement for $60,000 for all attorney’s fees and costs
Plaintiff incurred in anticipation of or in connection with this litigation is reasonable given
Plaintiff’s substantial efforts in this action. Those efforts include, but are not limited to: (1)
months-long efforts to work with the Forest Service to resolve the environmental issues in
connection with the Project without litigation; (2) submitting a 60-day Notice of Intent to Sue letter
to the Forest Service under the Endangered Species Act; (3) filing and arguing a successful motion
for a preliminary injunction; (4) over six months of work to informally resolve this action with the
Forest Service after the Complaint was filed; (5) working out interim conditions that allowed
the Project to proceed with environmental protections in place; and (6) filing a motion
for summary judgment on an expedited basis.
3 2