Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00211/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00211-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 05:702 Administrative Procedure 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA, ex rel. BILL

LOCKYER, ATTORNEY GENERAL,

NO. CIV. S 05-0211 MCE GGH

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURE; MIKE JOHANNS,

Secretary of the Department of

Agriculture; MARK REY, Under

Secretary of the Department of

Agriculture; UNITED STATES

FOREST SERVICE; DALE BOSWORTH,

Chief, United States Forest

Service; and JACK BLACKWELL,

Regional Forester, Pacific

Southwest Region, United

States Forest Service,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

On May 24, 2005, the California Cattlemen’s Association

(“Association”) applied for an Order Shortening Time to have its

motion for leave to intervene heard by this Court on June 6, 2005

Case 2:05-cv-00211-MCE-KJN Document 36 Filed 05/27/05 Page 1 of 3
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

at 9:00 a.m. Already scheduled for hearing at that time are

three separate motions brought by twenty (20) different interest

groups also seeking intervention either in this case or in a

related matter, Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign v. Rey,

et al., Case No. CIV-S-05-0205 MCE GGH. The Association asks

that the Court entertain its motion simultaneously with these

other motions brought by similarly situated proposed intervenors.

Plaintiff People of the State of California (“People”)

opposes the Association’s request on grounds that the Association

has proffered no excuse as to why its Motion for Intervention was

not timely filed so as to be heard on regular notice concurrently

with the other motions. The People also contend that they have

already filed their response to the other motions and “have not

had the opportunity to review and respond to the points addressed

in the Cattlemen’s Association supporting brief.” (Opposition,

2:15-17).

Although the People are correct in asserting that the

Association has provided no specific explanation for its failure

to file its intervention request sooner, they have nonetheless

demonstrated no prejudice in allowing the Association’s motion to

proceed concurrently with the twenty (20) other similar requests

already before the Court. In fact, in response to the other

motions, the People elected to file a single brief because those

motions all “raise the same legal issues and similar factual

issues.” (People’s Response to Motions to Intervene, 1: 26-27). 

The People have made no showing that the Association’s

intervention request raises issues any different that those

entailed in the other requests.

Case 2:05-cv-00211-MCE-KJN Document 36 Filed 05/27/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Because the Court finds that ruling on all the pending

intervention requests at the same time is clearly in the interest

of judicial economy, and in the absence of any demonstrable

prejudice to the People, the instant Application for Order

Shortening Time is GRANTED. The Association’s Motion for Leave

to File Answer in Intervention shall be heard on June 6, 2005 at

9:00 a.m. Opposition, if any, shall be filed not later than

Thursday, June 2, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. No reply will be permitted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 27, 2005

___________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-00211-MCE-KJN Document 36 Filed 05/27/05 Page 3 of 3