Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00068/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00068-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 05:0701 Maritime Subsidy Board

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFF ANDERSON, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs.

 v.

GINA McCARTHY, ET AL.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 16-00068 WHA

ORDER (1) REQUIRING IN

CAMERA REVIEW OF

DOCUMENTS; AND (2)

DENYING LEAVE TO

CONDUCT LIMITED

DISCOVERY

The Court is in receipt of plaintiffs’ motion to compel completion of the administrative

record and production of a privilege log. This order concludes that this issue is best decided in

the context of the overall motion for summary judgment. The current deadline for filing

summary judgment motions of September 16, 2016, will remain in place. In their summary

judgment briefs, plaintiffs shall lay out any alleged shortfalls in the administrative record. Then

the Court will be in a position to review any alleged gaps in the administrative record in the

context of the issues to be decided.

By NOON ON OCTOBER 4, 2016, the EPA shall submit for in camera review and under

seal the documents that relate to the development of the guidance that are not a part of the

administrative record, including pre-decisional and deliberative documents. The Court will then

determine the extent to which these documents should be part of the administrative record.

As to plaintiff’s motion for limited discovery on the failure to act claim, the motion for

summary judgment should be based on the administrative record. In the course of briefing,

Case 3:16-cv-00068-WHA Document 86 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

counsel can explain why further discovery is needed (even though discovery is the exception

rather than the rule with respect to review of agency action). The motion for limited discovery is

therefore DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

This order does not reach the issue of whether it was appropriate to file this motion as an

administrative motion under Local Rule 7-11.

No further extensions shall be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 7, 2016. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:16-cv-00068-WHA Document 86 Filed 09/07/16 Page 2 of 2