Hornbeck Offshore Services, L.L.C. v. Salazar et al

Filing 277

RESPONSE/MEMORANDUM in Opposition filed by All Defendants re 276 MOTION Entry of Final Judgment. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B)(Piropato, Marissa)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES,
LLC, et al.
Plaintiffs,
and

CIVIL ACTION No. 10-1663(F)(2)
SECTION F

DIAMOND OFFSHORE COMPANY,
JUDGE FELDMAN
Plaintiff-Intervenors,
v.

MAGISTRATE 2
MAGISTRATE WILKINSON

THE CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY, et al.,
Defendant-Intervenors,
and
KENNETH LEE "KEN" SALAZAR, et al,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ LIMITED OPPOSITION
TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
Defendants, Kenneth Lee Salazar, the United States Department of the Interior, Michael
R. Bromwich, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement
(“Defendants”) hereby file this limited opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of Final
Judgment and accompanying Proposed Final Judgment. Dkt. #276. Specifically, Defendants
request that this Court enter final judgment in accordance with its previous orders. Dkts. #226 &
#265. Defense counsel has conferred with Plaintiffs’ counsel, who indicated that at this juncture
Plaintiffs do not consent to the relief sought herein, but should Plaintiffs’ views change, they
would notify the Court.

Defendants request that Plaintiffs’ proposed language in its Proposed Final Judgment
concerning this Court’s finding of civil contempt be in the past tense, not the present tense as
Plaintiffs propose. See Dkt. #276-3 at ¶1. As this Court’s award of attorney’s fees reflects, this
Court’s finding of civil contempt was limited in time to conduct occurring from June 22, 2010 to
September 29, 2010. See Dkts. #226 at 7, #265 at 27 (“I find that September 29, 2010, is the
latest date when defendants could have been in contempt of the preliminary injunction.”).
Defendants therefore attach hereto a proposed final judgment that tracks Plaintiffs’
proposed judgment but revises one word in Plaintiffs’ proposed paragraph 1 so this Court’s
finding of civil contempt is in past tense consistent with this Court’s previous orders. See Ex. A
(Defendants’ (Proposed) Final Judgment). Defendants also attach a redline of Plaintiffs’
Proposed Final Judgment highlighting Defendants’ suggested revision. See Ex. B (Plaintiffs’’
(Proposed) Final Judgment).
Defendants thus respectfully request that this Court enter Final Judgment in the form as
set forth in Defendants’ proposed Final Judgment. See Ex. A.

Respectfully submitted, August 1, 2011

IGNACIA S. MORENO
Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Dept. of Justice, Env’t & Nat. Resources Div.
/s/Marissa A. Piropato
GUILLERMO A. MONTERO (T.A.)
BRIAN COLLINS
KRISTOFOR R. SWANSON
MARISSA A. PIROPATO
Natural Resources Section
PO Box 663
Washington, DC 20016
DEFENDANTS’ LIMITED OPP’N TO MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

2

Tel: [phone]
PETER MANSFIELD
Assistant United States Attorney
Eastern District of Louisiana
Hale Boggs Federal Building
500 Poydras Street, Suite B-210
New Orleans, Louisiana 70130
Tel: [phone]

DEFENDANTS’ LIMITED OPP’N TO MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on August 1, 2011, I caused a copy of the foregoing to be served
through the Court’s CM/ECF System to all parties.

/s/ Marissa A. Piropato
Marissa A. Piropato

DEFENDANTS’ LIMITED OPP’N TO MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

4