Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02228/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02228-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 18:4208(B) Agency Action Review

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CONSERVATION CONGRESS, a nonprofit organization,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE,

Defendant.

No. 2:14-CV-2228-GEB-AC 

ORDER GRANTING COUNTY OF 

SISKIYOU’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 

FILE AN AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN 

SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT*

The County of Siskiyou seeks leave to file an amicus 

curiae brief in support of Defendant‟s motion for summary 

judgment. The motion is unopposed. 

Plaintiff‟s Complaint “challeng[es] Defendant United 

States Forest Service‟s decision to authorize the Porcupine 

Vegetation and Road Management Project” (“the Project”) and seeks 

to “enjoin Defendant Forest Service from continuing the operation 

of any timber sale.” (Compl. ¶¶ 1, 84, ECF No. 1.) The County 

argues its proposed amicus brief would benefit the court because 

it represents “the perspective of those who will be most directly 

impacted by the Court‟s decision” since the Project is located in 

Siskiyou County (Notice of Mot. & Mot. File Amicus Curiae Brief 

 

* The hearing on February 2, 2015 is vacated since this matter is suitable 

for decision without oral argument pursuant to E.D. Cal. R. 230(g).

Case 2:14-cv-02228-GEB-AC Document 28 Filed 01/22/15 Page 1 of 2
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

(“Mot.”) 4:5-6, ECF No. 21.) 

“District courts frequently welcome amicus briefs from 

nonparties concerning legal issues that have potential 

ramifications beyond the parties directly involved or if the 

amicus has „unique information or perspective that can help the 

court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties are able 

to provide.‟” NGV Gaming, Ltd. v. Upstream Point Molate, LLC, 335 

F. Supp. 2d 1016, 1067 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (quotation omitted). 

In light of the broad discretion the Court has when 

deciding whether to permit a putative amicus curiae to file a 

brief, and the argument the County makes in its motion, the 

County‟s motion for leave to file an amicus brief in support of 

the Defendant‟s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.

Dated: January 21, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-02228-GEB-AC Document 28 Filed 01/22/15 Page 2 of 2