Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02492/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02492-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 16:1538 Endangered Species Act

---

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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

Lisa T. Belenky (CA Bar No. 203225) 

Center for Biological Diversity

1095 Market St., Suite 511

San Francisco, CA 94103

Telephone: (415) 436-9682 x307

Facsimile: (415) 436-9683

SUE ELLEN WOOLDRIDGE

Assistant Attorney General

Environment & Natural Resources Division

JEAN WILLIAMS, Chief

LISA L. RUSSELL, Assistant Chief

COURTNEY TAYLOR, Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Justice

Environment & Natural Resources Division

Wildlife & Marine Resources Section

Ben Franklin Station, P.O. Box 7369

Washington, D.C. 20044-7369

Telephone: (202) 353-7548

Facsimile: (202) 305-0275

Attorneys for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, ) Case No. 2:05-CV-2492-DFL-KJM

)

Plaintiff, ) STIPULATED SETTLEMENT

) & ORDER

vs. )

)

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE )

SERVICE, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

 )

Plaintiff, the Center for Biological Diversity (the “Center”), and Defendants, the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service and P. Lynn Scarlett, Acting Secretary of the Interior (“Secretary”), by

and through their undersigned counsel, state as follows:

WHEREAS, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“Service”), pursuant to the

Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., published a final rule listing the

Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep as endangered. 65 Fed. Reg. 20-30 (January 30, 2000). 

WHEREAS, in the above Federal Register notice, the Service found that designating

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 1 of 7
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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

- 2 -

critical habitat for the species was “prudent.”

WHEREAS, on December 8, 2005, Plaintiff filed a Complaint for declaratory and

injunctive relief, pursuant to the ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. and the Administrative Procedure

Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 706. The Complaint challenged the Service’s failure to designate

critical habitat for the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants, through their authorized representatives, and

without any admission or final adjudication of the issues of fact or law with respect to Plaintiff’s

claims, have reached a settlement that they consider to be a just, fair, adequate, and equitable

resolution of the disputes set forth in Plaintiff’s Complaint.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants agree that settlement of this action in this manner is

in the public interest and is an appropriate way to resolve the dispute between them.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS

FOLLOWS:

1. The Service shall submit for publication in the Federal Register a proposed critical

habitat designation for the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep by July 17, 2007. The Service shall

submit to the Federal Register a determination on the proposed critical habitat designation for

the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep by no later than July 17, 2008.

2. Either party may seek to modify the deadline for any actions specified in Paragraph 1

for good cause shown. In that event, or in the event that either party believes that the other party

has failed to comply with any term or condition of this Agreement, the parties shall use the

dispute resolution procedures specified in Paragraph 3. 

3. The Order entering this Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) may be modified by the

Court upon good cause shown by written stipulation between the parties, filed with and approved

by the Court, or upon written motion filed by one of the parties and granted by the Court. In the

event that either party seeks to modify the terms of this Agreement, including the deadline for the

actions specified in Paragraph 1, or in the event of a dispute arising out of or relating to this

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 2 of 7
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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

- 3 -

Agreement, or in the event that either party believes that the other party has failed to comply with

any term or condition of this Agreement, the party seeking the modification, raising the dispute,

or seeking enforcement shall provide the other party with written notice of the claim. The parties

agree that they will meet and confer (in-person not required) at the earliest possible time in a

good-faith effort to resolve the claim before bringing any matter to the Court. If the parties are

unable to resolve the claim within 30 days after the notice, either party may bring the claim to the

Court.

4. No party shall use this Agreement or the terms herein as evidence of what does or does

not constitute a reasonable time line for designation of critical habitat in any other proceeding

regarding the Service’s implementation of the ESA.

5. Defendants agree that Plaintiff is the “prevailing party” in this action and agree to pay

Plaintiff reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, pursuant to Section 11(g) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. §

1540 (g). Therefore, Defendants agree to settle all of Plaintiff’s claims for costs and attorneys’

fees in the above-captioned litigation for a total of $6617.00. A check will be made payable in

that amount to Plaintiff’s undersigned counsel, Center for Biological Diversity;

6. Defendants agree to submit all necessary paperwork to the Department of the

Treasury’s Judgment Fund Office, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1540(g)(4), within ten (10) business

days of receipt of the signed court order approving this stipulation;

7. Plaintiff agrees to accept payment of $6617.00 in full satisfaction of any and all claims

for attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation to which Plaintiff is entitled in the above-captioned

litigation, through and including the date of this agreement;

8. Plaintiff agrees that receipt of this payment from Defendants shall operate as a release

of Plaintiff’s claims for attorneys’ fees and costs in this matter, through and including the date of

this agreement;

9. The parties agree that Plaintiff reserves the right to seek additional fees and costs

incurred subsequent to this agreement arising from a need to enforce or defend against efforts to

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 3 of 7
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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

- 4 -

modify the underlying schedule outlined in Paragraph 1, or for any other unforseen continuation

of this action;

10. By this agreement, Defendants do not waive any right to contest fees claimed by

Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s counsel, including the hourly rate, in any future litigation, or continuation

of the present action. Further, this stipulation as to attorneys’ fees and costs has no precedential

value and shall not be used as evidence in any other attorneys’ fees litigation.

11. Subject to the qualifications in Paragraph 13, no provision of this Agreement shall be

interpreted as, or constitute, a commitment or requirement that Defendant take action in

contravention of the Endangered Species Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, or any other law

or regulation, either substantive or procedural. Nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall be

construed to limit or modify the discretion accorded to the Service by the ESA, the APA, or

general principles of administrative law with respect to the procedures to be followed in making

any determination required herein, or as to the substance of any final determination. 

12. Defendants assert that no provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted as, or

constitute, a commitment or requirement that Defendant is obligated to spend funds in violation

of the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341. In response, Plaintiff asserts that this Agreement

does not create a conflict with the Anti-Deficiency Act because the duty to designate critical

habitat is required in non-discretionary terms by the ESA and because the Anti-Deficiency Act

would not excuse compliance with a pre-existing court-approved Agreement. Plaintiff reserves

the right to assert this position and other arguments if the Service fails to comply with the terms

of this Agreement for reasons of insufficient appropriations. The Service reserves all legal and

equitable defense to such a claim. 

13. The parties agree that this Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) was negotiated in

good faith and it constitutes a settlement of claims that were vigorously contested, denied, and

disputed by the parties. By entering into this Agreement Plaintiff and Defendants do not waive

any claim or defense.

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 4 of 7
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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

- 5 -

14. The undersigned representatives of each party certify that they are fully authorized by

the party or parties they represent to agree to the Court’s entry of the terms and conditions of this

Agreement and do hereby agree to the terms herein.

15. The terms of this Agreement shall become effective upon entry of an order by the

Court ratifying the Agreement.

16. Upon approval of this Agreement by the Court, all counts of Plaintiff’s Complaint

shall be dismissed with prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).

17. Notwithstanding the dismissal of this action, the parties hereby stipulate and

respectfully request that the U.S. District Court retain jurisdiction to oversee compliance with the

terms of this Agreement and to resolve any motions to modify such terms. See Kokkonen v.

Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994).

Respectfully submitted on June 2, 2006,

S/ Lisa Belenky

 

LISA T. BELENKY

Center for Biological Diversity

1095 Market St., Suite 511

San Francisco, CA 94103

Telephone: (415) 436-9682 x307

Facsimile: (415) 436-9683

Attorney for Plaintiffs

*Plaintiff’s attorney authorized signing on her

behalf on June 2, 2006

SUE ELLEN WOOLDRIDGE

Assistant Attorney General

JEAN E. WILLIAMS, Section Chief

LISA L. RUSSELL, Assistant Section Chief

S/Courtney Taylor

_____________________________________

COURTNEY TAYLOR, Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Justice

Wildlife & Marine Resources Section

Environment & Natural Resources Division

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 5 of 7
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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

- 6 -

U.S. Department of Justice

Wildlife & Marine Resources Section

Ben Franklin Station, P.O. Box 7369

Washington, D.C. 20044-7369

Telephone: (202) 353-7548

Facsimile: (202) 305-0275

Attorneys for Federal Defendants

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 6 of 7
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 Case No. 2:05-CV-2492 DFL-KJM

- 7 -

ORDER

The terms and conditions of this Stipulated Settlement Agreement are hereby adopted as

an enforceable ORDER of this Court, and this matter is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. 

Dated: this 6 day of June 2006.

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-02492-DFL -KJM Document 15 Filed 06/07/06 Page 7 of 7