WildEarth Guardians v. Klein et al

Filing 19

ORDER granting 16 Colowyo Coal Company, L.P.'s Motion to Intervene. By Judge John L. Kane on 6/17/13.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-518-JLK
WILDEARTH GUARDIANS,
Plaintiff,
v.
U.S. OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING, RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT, AL KLEIN,
in his official capacity as Western Regional Director of the Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Denver, Colorado, and SALLY JEWELL, in her official capacity
as U.S. Secretary of the Interior,
Defendants, and
COLOWYO COAL COMPANY, L.P.
Defendant-Intervenor, and
TRAPPER MINING, INC.,
Defendant-Intervenor.
ORDER GRANTING COLOWYO COAL COMPANY, L.P.’S MOTION TO INTERVENE
Kane, J.

This matter is currently before me on Proposed Defendant-Intervenor Colowyo Coal
Company, L.P.’s Motion to Intervene, Doc. 16. After carefully considering the motion and
applying the legal standards set forth by the Tenth Circuit in San Juan County, Utah v. United
States, 503 F.3d 1163, 1188 (10th Cir. 2007)(en banc), I am persuaded to GRANT the motion.
The Court accepts the Answer filed at Doc. 17.
In the interest of the efficient conduct of the proceedings, however, DefendantIntervenor’s participation is not without limitation. Rule 24(a)(2)’s “reference to practical
consideration in determining whether an applicant can intervene implies that those same

considerations can justify limitations on the scope of intervention.” San Juan County, 503 F.3d
at 1189. “[I]ntervention of right under the amended rule may be subject to appropriate
considerations or restrictions responsive among other things to the requirements of efficient
conduct of the proceedings.” Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 Advisory Committee Notes (1966
Amendment)).
Accordingly, counsel for Defendants and counsel for Defendant-Intervenor must confer
before filing any motion, responsive filing, or brief to determine whether their positions may be
set forth in a consolidated fashion. Defendant-Intervenor may file separate motions, responsive
filings, or briefs only to raise arguments or issues Defendants decline to raise in their filings.
Those arguments must be limited to the claims raised by the original parties; arguments relating
to collateral issues will be stricken as immaterial. Any separate filings must include a Certificate
of Compliance, confirming compliance with this conferral requirement. The Certificate of
Compliance should also include a statement that the Defendants’ position does not adequately
cover the issues Defendant-Intervenor seeks to raise.

DATED:

June 17, 2013

BY THE COURT:
/s/John L. Kane
John L. Kane, U.S. Senior District Judge