North Sacramento Land Company et al v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service et al
Filing
13
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/13/2011 re 12 ORDERING that the court ADOPTS the schedule for the case is follows: Filing Deadline of Administrative Record 8/12/2011 ; Motion to Supplement Administrative Record ddl 9/9/11; Opposition ddl 9/30/11; Reply ddl 10/14/11; Motion for Summary Judgment ddl 10/31/2011; opposition/cross motion ddl 11/18/11; plt's opposition to cross motion and reply ddl 12/2/11; reply to cross motion ddl 12/16/11. If there are motions to supplement the record, the Parties will file a proposed briefing schedule within 10 days after the Court acts on those motions.(Duong, D)
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
NORTH SACRAMENTO LAND
COMPANY; LEVEE DISTRICT 1;
RECLAMATION DISTRICT 784;
SACRAMENTO VALLEY LANDOWNERS
ASSOCIATION; BUTTE COUNTY FARM
BUREAU; SOLANO COUNTY FARM
BUREAU; and YOLO COUNTY FARM
BUREAU,
11
12
13
14
ORDER ON JOINT STATUS REPORT
Plaintiffs,
v.
9
10
CASE NO. 2:11-CV-943-JAM-KJN
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE; KEN SALAZAR, in his official
capacity as Secretary of Interior; ROWAN W.
GOULD, in his official capacity as Acting
Director of UNITED STATES FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE; and REN
LOHOEFENER in his official capacity as
Regional Director of the Pacific Southwest
Region of the UNITED STATES FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE,
15
16
Defendants.
ORDER
17
18
19
20
Based on the agreed report filed by the parties, IT IS SO ORDERED that the schedule for this
case is as follows:
August 12, 2011:
Administrative Record Filed
September 9, 2011:
Any Motions to Supplement Administrative Record
September 30, 2011:
Oppositions to Motions to Supplement Administrative Record
24
October 14, 2011:
Replies for Motions to Supplement Administrative Record
25
If no motions to supplement the administrative record are filed, the Parties will file their
21
22
23
26
27
28
summary judgment briefing as follows:
October 31, 2011:
Plaintiffs file their motion for summary judgment.
___________________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
1
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
2:11-CV-943-JAM-KJN
1
November 18, 2011:
The Service files its combined cross motion for summary
2
judgment and opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary
3
judgment.
4
December 2, 2011:
5
6
Plaintiffs file their combined opposition to the Service’s cross
motion and reply.
December 16, 2011:
The Service files its reply to Plaintiffs’ opposition.
7
If there are motions to supplement the record, the Parties will file a proposed briefing schedule
8
9
10
within 10 days after the Court acts on those motions. The Parties are excused from the requirements of
Local Rule 260(a)-(c) regarding statements of facts to accompany motions for summary judgment.
11
12
DATED: 6/13/2011
/s/ John A. Mendez________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
___________________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
2
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
2:11-CV-943-JAM-KJN
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
