Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03508/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03508-14/pdf.json

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

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA ex rel. BILL LOCKYER,

et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. C05-03508 EDL consolidated with v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURE; MIKE JOHANNS,

Secretary of the Department of Agriculture,

et al.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY, CALIFORNIA

WILDERNESS COALITION, et al.,

 No. C05-04038 EDL

Plaintiffs,

ORDER REQUESTING FURTHER

BRIEFING AND INFORMATION

FOLLOWING AUGUST 1, 2006

HEARING

v.

UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, an agency

of the United States Department of Agriculture;

DALE BOSWORTH, Chief of the United States

Forest Service, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

The Court held a hearing on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment on August 1,

2006. The parties shall file the following further briefing or information no later than August 18,

2006:

Case 3:05-cv-03508-EDL Document 165 Filed 08/07/06 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

1. A list, preferably by stipulation of the parties, of inventoried roadless areas that cross state

boundaries with supporting evidence (e.g., judicially noticeable material). In the unlikely

event that the parties cannot reach a stipulation, the parties may file separate memoranda

containing their competing views with citations. 

2. A list, preferably by stipulation, of which states have filed, or announced that they do or do

not intend to file, petitions under the State Petitions Rule with supporting evidence (e.g.,

judicially noticeable material). Please include what protection the petitioning states seek or

intend to seek for inventoried roadless areas in that state. In the unlikely event that the

parties cannot reach a stipulation, the parties may file separate memoranda containing their

competing views with citations. 

3. A list, preferably by stipulation, of approvals or disapprovals by the Forest Service Chief of

any projects in inventoried roadless areas under interim directives, and of any projects that

were approved or disapproved during lapses in the interim directives, with supporting

evidence (e.g., judicially noticeable material). In the unlikely event that the parties cannot

reach a stipulation, the parties may file separate memoranda containing their competing

views with citations. 

4. A list, preferably by stipulation, of agency actions as to which the Forest Service has invoked

the categorical exclusion relied on in this case. See Defs.’ Ex. 11 (Forest Service Handbook)

at § 30.12(2). In the unlikely event that the parties cannot reach a stipulation, the parties may

file separate memoranda containing their competing views with citations. 

5. Briefing as to whether NEPA analysis or an ESA consultation has been performed

voluntarily or ordered by courts when an agency repealed a rule that had gone through NEPA

and/or ESA analysis and contained substantive environmental protections, but did not

replace the previous rule with a new rule. Briefs from the parties may not exceed ten pages. 

Briefs, if any, from amici may be not exceed five pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 7, 2006 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03508-EDL Document 165 Filed 08/07/06 Page 2 of 2