Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00494/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00494-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1319 Clean Water Act

---

1

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND PROPOSED ORDER 

230028.1

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

RALPH ROBINSON (SBN 51436) 

MATTHEW RANDLE (SBN 238345) 

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, 

EDELMAN & DICKER LLP 

525 Market Street, 17th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Telephone: (415) 433-0990 

Facsimile: (415) 434-1370 

Attorneys for Defendant 

TOMRA PACIFIC, INC. AND 

TOMRA OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING 

PROTECTION ALLIANCE, a non-profit 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

TOMRA PACIFIC, INC., TOMRA OF 

NORTH AMERICA, INC.,

 Defendants. 

Case No. 2:06-cv-00494-DFL-DAD 

STIPULATION TO FURTHER 

EXTEND TIME TO FILE A RESPONSE 

TO THE COMPLAINT AND ORDER 

(Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 

33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 to 1387) 

Complaint Filed: March 3, 2006 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-144 of the United States District Court, Eastern 

District of California, Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and Defendants 

Tomra Pacific, Inc. and Tomra of North America, Inc., through their respective attorneys, 

hereby stipulate to request that the Court grant Defendants a further extension of thirty days 

to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint, so the parties may finalize a 

settlement that has been reached in principle and efficiently resolve this case. Defendants’ 

response shall be due on or before August 26, 2006. This stipulated extension will not alter 

any other deadline or date already fixed by the Court. 

Case 2:06-cv-00494-DFL-DAD Document 15 Filed 08/03/06 Page 1 of 3
2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND PROPOSED ORDER 

230028.1

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

A prior stipulation was entered into by the parties and submitted to the Court on May 

26, 2006, extending the time for defendants to respond to the complaint until June 27, 2006. 

A further stipulation was entered into by the parties and submitted to the Court on June 27, 

2006, extending the time for Defendants to respond to the complaint until July 27, 2006. 

The parties stipulate to this further extension of time for defendants to respond to the 

complaint until August 26, 2006 in the interest of finalizing settlement negotiations. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Dated: July 31, 2006 LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW L. PACKARD 

 By: /s/ Michael Lynes______

 

Michael P. Lynes 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING 

PROTECTION ALLIANCE 

[Authorized by attorney on 7/31/2006] 

Dated: July 31, 2006 WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & 

DICKER LLP 

 By: /s/ Matthew Randle______

 

Ralph Robinson 

Matthew Randle 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

TOMRA PACIFIC, INC., TOMRA NORTH 

AMERICA, INC. 

 [Authorized by attorney on 7/31/2006] 

Case 2:06-cv-00494-DFL-DAD Document 15 Filed 08/03/06 Page 2 of 3
3

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND PROPOSED ORDER 

230028.1

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

ORDER

FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

Defendants Tomra Pacific, Inc. and Tomra of North America, Inc. shall have a 

further extension of thirty days to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s 

complaint. Defendants’ response shall be due on or before August 26, 2006. 

Dated: 8/2/2006

______________________________ 

DAVID F. LEVI 

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00494-DFL-DAD Document 15 Filed 08/03/06 Page 3 of 3