Olympic Forest Coalition v. Coast Seafoods Company

Filing 34

ORDER granting 32 Motion to Certify Order for Interlocutory Appeal; signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.(DN)

1

The Honorable Ronald B. Leighton

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

9
10
11

OLYMPIC FOREST COALITION, a
Washington non-profit corporation,
Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-05068-RBL
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.
COAST SEAFOODS COMPANY, a
Washington corporation,

15

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CERTIFY
ORDER FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL
AND MOTION TO STAY

Defendant.

16
17

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Certify

18

Order for Interlocutory Appeal and Motion to Stay, and the Court having considered the records

19

and files herein, the Court expressly finds as follows:

20

1.

The Court's order denying defendant Coast Seafoods Company's ("Coast")

21

motion to dismiss, entered June 3, 2016 (Dkt. 21) (the "Order"), involves a controlling question

22

of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion.

23

2.

The question of law presented in the Order is whether the Clean Water

24

Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1376, requires an aquatic animal production facility that is not a

25

concentrated facility under 40 C.F.R. § 122.24, but that discharges effluent from a discrete

26

conveyance, to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit.

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO CERTIFY
ORDER FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL AND MOTION TO STAY
70115276.1

MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP
AT T OR NE YS AT LAW
T: 503.224.5858 | F: 503.224.0155
3 4 0 0 U. S. B AN CO RP T OW E R
1 1 1 S.W . FI FT H AVEN UE
P ORT L A N D , O RE GO N 9 7 2 0 4

1

This question turns on the applicability and interpretation of Ass'n to Protect Hammersley, Eld.

2

& Totten Inlets v. Taylor Res., Inc., 299 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2002), League of Wilderness

3

Defenders/Blue Mountain Biodiversity Project v. Forsgren, 309 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2002), and

4

Nw. Envtl. Def. Cir. v. Brown, 640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011), rev'd on other grounds, 133 S.Ct.

5

1326 (2013).

6
7

3.

An immediate appeal from the Order may materially advance the

termination of this litigation.

8

Based on these findings:

9

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Coast Seafoods Company's motion to certify the

10

Order for interlocutory appeal is GRANTED.

11
12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the event the Ninth Circuit accepts
certification, this proceeding is stayed during the pendency of the interlocutory appeal.
DATED this 8th day of August, 2016.

13
14

A

15

Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

16
17

Presented by:

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

By: s/ Joseph Vance, P.C.
Joseph Vance, P.C., WSB No. 25531
Hong N. Huynh, WSB No. 45044
Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP
111 S.W. Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400
Portland, Oregon 97204
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant Coast Seafoods Company

25
26

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DFEFRENDANT’S MOTION TO CERTIFY
ORDER FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL AND MOTION TO STAY
(3:16-cv-05068-JRC)
70115276.1

MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP
AT T OR NE YS AT LAW
T: 503.224.5858 | F: 503.224.0155
3 4 0 0 U. S. B AN CO RP T OW E R
1 1 1 S.W . FI FT H AVEN UE
P ORT L A N D , O RE GO N 9 7 2 0 4