Sierra Club et al v. McLerran et al

Filing 250

ORDER granting Defendants' 249 Motion to Modify Summary Judgment Briefing Schedule. Signed by Judge Barbara J. Rothstein.(MW)

Case 2:11-cv-01759-BJR Document 250 Filed 12/30/21 Page 1 of 4

1

HONORABLE BARBARA J. ROTHSTEIN

2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

SIERRA CLUB, et al.,

11

Plaintiffs,

12

and

13
14

THE SPOKANE TRIBE OF INDIANS,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,

15
16
17
18
19

v.
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY, et al.,
Defendants,

20
21
22
23
24
25
26

and
SPOKANE COUNTY; KAISER
ALUMINUM WASHINGTON LLC; and
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C11-1759BJR
UNOPPOSED MOTION, AND
PROPOSED ORDER, TO MODIFY
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE TO ALLOW EPA TO
COMPLETE ITS REVIEW OF A
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT

Defendant-Intervenors.
___________________________________

27
28
29
30
31
32

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO MODIFY
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ORDER - 1

Case No. C11-1759BJR

David J. Kaplan
United States Department of Justice
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington D.C. 20044

Case 2:11-cv-01759-BJR Document 250 Filed 12/30/21 Page 2 of 4

1

Defendants the Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, et al.

2

(collectively “EPA”), submit this motion to extend by 21 days the existing dates set forth in the

3

Court’s order (Dkt No. 248) for briefing on Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and on

4

EPA’s and the Intervenor-Defendants’ prospective cross-motions for summary judgment, to

5
6

allow EPA adequate time to complete its final review of a proposed consent decree. That decree,

7

if approved by EPA senior officials and entered by the Court, would result in a full resolution of

8

this lawsuit and thus render summary judgment motions moot. The undersigned counsel has

9

been authorized by the respective counsel for the other parties in this case -- Plaintiffs Sierra

10
11

Club and Center for Environmental Law & Policy, Plaintiff-Intervenor Spokane Tribe of Indians,

12

Defendant-Intervenor State of Washington Department of Ecology, Defendant-Intervenor

13

Spokane County, and Defendant-Intervenor Kaiser Aluminum Washington LLC -- to represent

14

that they do not oppose the relief requested by this motion.

15

This Court previously granted an extension of the summary judgment briefing schedule

16
17

in this case to afford EPA and Plaintiffs and Plaintiff-Intervenor time to explore settlement of

18

this case. Since that time, these parties have negotiated a proposed consent decree that, if fully

19

approved and entered by the Court, would resolve this lawsuit. EPA, however, requires up to an

20

additional 21 days to complete its final review of the proposed consent decree before it can

21
22

approve and sign the proposed consent decree and file it with the Court for entry. Accordingly,

23

EPA requests that the existing summary judgment deadlines be extended by 21 days. In the

24

unlikely event that EPA does not by that time approve the proposed consent decree and file it

25

with the Court, EPA will confer with the other parties and file an appropriate motion governing

26
27

any further modifications that may be necessary to the summary judgment briefing schedule.

28
29
30
31
32

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO MODIFY
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ORDER - 2

Case No. C11-1759BJR

David J. Kaplan
United States Department of Justice
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington D.C. 20044

Case 2:11-cv-01759-BJR Document 250 Filed 12/30/21 Page 3 of 4

1
2
3

Accordingly, if this 21-day extension request is granted, the schedule would be as
follows:
1.A.

4
5

1.B.

6
7
8

2.A.

9
10
11

16

Oppositions to Plaintiffs’ Motion for SJ and
Cross-Motions for SJ, by Spokane County, Kaiser Aluminum,
and the State of Washington
(each limited to 20 pages)

Jan. 25, 2022

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Opposition to the Cross-Motions
for SJ and Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for SJ
(limited to 30 pages)

Jan. 25, 2022

Spokane Tribe’s Consolidated Opposition to the Cross-Motions
for SJ and Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for SJ
(limited to 20 pages)
Feb 15, 2022

3.A.

EPA’s Reply in Support of its Cross-Motion for SJ
(limited to 20 pages)

14
15

Jan. 25, 2022

2.B.

12
13

EPA’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for SJ and
Cross-Motion for SJ (limited to 30 pages)

3.B.

March 1, 2022

Replies in Support of EPA’s Cross-Motion for SJ, by Spokane County,
Kaiser Aluminum, and the State of Washington
(each limited to 10 pages)
March 1, 2022

17
18
19
20
21

ORDER

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED, on this 30th day of December, 2021.

24

A

25

Barbara Jacobs Rothstein
U.S. District Court Judge

26
27
28
29
30
31
32

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO MODIFY
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ORDER - 3

Case No. C11-1759BJR

David J. Kaplan
United States Department of Justice
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington D.C. 20044

Case 2:11-cv-01759-BJR Document 250 Filed 12/30/21 Page 4 of 4

1

Respectfully submitted by:
By: /S/ David Kaplan
David J. Kaplan
Attorney for Federal Defendants
United States Department of Justice
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington, DC 20044
[phone]
[e-mail]

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO MODIFY
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ORDER - 4

Case No. C11-1759BJR

David J. Kaplan
United States Department of Justice
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington D.C. 20044