Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01053/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01053-61/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment

---

1

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

1221859.2 10355-025 1

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES

COUNSEL IDENTIFICATION ON FOLLOWING PAGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CONSOLIDATED SALMON CASES CASE NOS.

1:09-cv-1053-LJO-BAM

1:09-cv-1090-LJO-DLB

1:09-cv-1378-LJO-DLB

1:09-cv-1520-LJO-DLB

1:09-cv-1580-LJO-DLB

1:09-cv-1625-LJO-DLB

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 

REGARDING MOTIONS FOR 

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER 

EXPENSES

Judge: Hon. Lawrence J. O’Neill

SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER 

AUTHORITY, et al. v. GARY. F. LOCKE, et 

al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-1053),

STOCKTON EAST WATER DISTRICT v. 

NOAA, et al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-1090),

STATE WATER CONTRACTORS v. 

GARY F. LOCKE, et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-1378)

KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY, et al. v. 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-1520)

OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT, et al. 

v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, et 

al. (Case No. 1:09-cv-1580),

METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA v. NMFS, et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-1625),

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 771 Filed 03/19/15 Page 1 of 5
1

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

1221859.2 10355-025 2

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES

IDENTIFICATION OF COUNSEL

DANIEL J. O’HANLON (SBN 122380)

HANSPETER WALTER (SBN 244847)

REBECCA R. AKROYD (SBN 267305)

ELIZABETH L. LEEPER (SBN 280451)

KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN 

& GIRARD

400 Capitol Mall, 27th Floor

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 321-4500

Facsimile: (916) 321-4555

EILEEN M. DIEPENBROCK (SBN 119254)

DAVID A. DIEPENBROCK (SBN 215679)

JONATHAN R. MARZ (SBN 221188)

DIEPENBROCK ELKIN, LLP

500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2200

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 492-5000

Facsimile: (916) 446-2640

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER 

AUTHORITY

BRADLEY H. OLIPHANT (SBN 216468)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Wildlife and Marine Resources Section

999 18th St., South Terrace, Ste. 370

Denver, CO 80211

Telephone: (303) 844-1381

Facsimile: (303) 844-1350

WILLIAM J. SHAPIRO (CO State Bar 030929)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

501 I Street, Ste. 9-700

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 930-2207

Facsimile: (916) 930-2010

Attorneys for FEDERAL DEFENDANTS

STEVEN M. ANDERSON (SBN 186700)

STEVEN G. MARTIN (SBN 263394)

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

3390 University Avenue, 5th Floor

P. O. Box 1028

Riverside, CA 92502

Telephone: (951) 686-1450

Facsimile: (951) 686-3083

Attorneys for Plaintiff

STATE WATER CONTRACTORS

WILLIAM C. PARIS, III (SBN 168712)

TIMOTHY P. O’LAUGHLIN (SBN 116807)

O’LAUGHLIN & PARIS LLP

P.O. Box 9259

Chico, CA 95927

Telephone: (530) 899-9755

Facsimile: (530) 899-1367

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT and 

SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION 

DISTRICT

KARNA E. HARRIGFELD (SBN 162824)

JEANNE M. ZOLEZZI (SBN 121282)

ALEXIS KEANE STEVENS (SBN 260756)

HERUM\CRABTREE\SUNTAG

5757 Pacific Avenue, Suite 222

Stockton, CA 95207

Telephone: (209) 472-7700

Facsimile: (209) 472-7986

Attorneys for Plaintiff

STOCKTON EAST WATER DISTRICT

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 771 Filed 03/19/15 Page 2 of 5
1

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

1221859.2 10355-025 3

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES

To facilitate settlement discussions regarding claims for attorneys’ fees and other expenses 

in this case by Plaintiffs San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, State Water Contractors, 

Stockton East Water District, Oakdale Irrigation District, and South San Joaquin Irrigation District 

(collectively, “Plaintiffs”), the Plaintiffs and Defendants Sally Jewell, Secretary of Interior, et al. 

(“Federal Defendants”) jointly move this Court to stay briefing on the Plaintiffs’ motions for 

recovery of attorneys’ fees and other expenses for 180 days. In support of this motion, the 

Plaintiffs and Federal Defendants stipulate as follows:

1. The Court entered Final Judgment in this consolidated action on December 12, 

2011. Doc. 655. The Final Judgment ordered that the parties “meet and confer regarding any 

request by Plaintiffs, or any of them, and/or DWR for recovery of attorneys’ fees and/or costs. 

Any motion for recovery of attorneys’ fees and/or costs shall be filed on or before March 1, 2012.” 

Id. On February 22, 2012 a Stipulation and Order Re Motion For Attorneys’ Fees and/or Costs 

was filed, which extended the time for filing any motion for recovery of attorneys’ fees and/or 

costs (“Fee Motion”) beyond the date specified in the Final Judgment. Doc. 688. The Stipulation 

and Order provides that “[a]ny Fee Motion shall be filed by Plaintiffs, or by any of them, and/or 

by DWR no later than 90 days following the entry of a final order disposing of all appeals and 

cross-appeals in the above-captioned Consolidated Salmon Cases.” Id. The Ninth Circuit Court 

of Appeals issued its opinion on the appeals and cross-appeal for the Consolidated Salmon Cases

on December 22, 2014. Doc. 761; San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Auth. v. Locke, No. 12-

15144, 2014 WL 7240003 (9th Cir. Dec. 22, 2014). 

2. Concurrently with this joint motion and stipulation, the Plaintiffs have filed

separate motions for recovery of attorneys’ fees and other expenses for this litigation, under the 

Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, based on the Plaintiffs’ successful National 

Environmental Policy Act claims. Discussions regarding the Plaintiffs’ requests are ongoing, and 

the Plaintiffs and Federal Defendants seek additional time to attempt to settle the Plaintiffs’ claims 

without unnecessarily burdening the Court. The Plaintiffs and Federal Defendants agree that 

briefing and argument on the Plaintiffs’ claims for fees and other expenses may be unnecessary in 

light of the parties’ intent to attempt to settle the Plaintiffs’ claims.

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 771 Filed 03/19/15 Page 3 of 5
1

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

1221859.2 10355-025 4

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES

3. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs and Federal Defendants agree that further proceedings 

on the Plaintiffs’ motions for recovery of fees and other expenses, including the filing of further 

memoranda and evidentiary and other materials supporting those motions, and any oppositions

thereafter, should be stayed for 180 days to allow for settlement discussions. 

4. At the conclusion of 180 days, the Plaintiffs and Federal Defendants will apprise 

the Court of any settlement or further requested action, or jointly propose a briefing schedule to 

address the Plaintiffs’ motions for fees and other expenses if there has been no complete

settlement. That schedule will provide for the Plaintiffs to supplement their motions for recovery 

of attorneys’ fees and other expenses with documentation of all time and expenses sought, 

including the additional time spent in seeking fees, opposition by the Federal Defendants, and 

reply by the Plaintiffs, with a hearing for each motion if the Court deems hearings necessary. 

Based on the joint stipulation set forth above, the parties respectfully request that this 

Court stay briefing and argument on the Plaintiffs’ concurrently filed motions for recovery of 

attorneys’ fees and other expenses for 180 days from the date of the Court’s order granting such 

stay, in the manner provided above.

Respectfully submitted this 19th day of March, 2015.

Dated: March 19, 2015 DIEPENBROCK ELKIN, LLP

A Professional Corporation

KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD

A Professional Corporation

By: /s/ Daniel J. O’Hanlon

Daniel J. O’Hanlon

Eileen M. Diepenbrock

Attorneys for Plaintiffs, 

SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER 

AUTHORITY and WESTLANDS WATER 

DISTRICT

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 771 Filed 03/19/15 Page 4 of 5
1

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

1221859.2 10355-025 5

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES

Dated: March 19, 2015 BEST BEST & KRIEGER, LLP

By: /s/ Steven M. Anderson

Steven M. Anderson

Attorneys for Plaintiff, 

STATE WATER CONTRACTORS

Dated: March 19, 2015 HERUM\CRABTREE\SUNTAG

By: /s/ Karna E. Harrigfeld

Karna E. Harrigfeld

Attorneys for Plaintiff, 

STOCKTON EAST WATER DISTRICT

Dated: March 19, 2015 O’LAUGHLIN & PARIS, LLP

By: /s/ William C. Paris, III

William C. Paris, III

Attorneys for Plaintiffs, 

OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT and 

SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION 

DISTRICT

Dated: March 19, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Environmental & Natural Resources Division

By: /s/ William Shapiro

William Shapiro, Trial Attorney

Attorneys for FEDERAL DEFENDANTS

SO ORDERED

Dated: March 19, 2015

 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

 United States District Judge

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 771 Filed 03/19/15 Page 5 of 5