Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06553/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06553-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 16:1538 Endangered Species Act

---

-1- 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, 

VACATING LISTING DECISION, AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS 

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

Jeanne M. Zolezzi, Esq., SBN: 121282 

Jennifer L. Spaletta, Esq. SBN: 200032 

HERUM CRABTREE BROWN 

A California Professional Corporation 

2291 W. March Lane, Suite B100 

Stockton, California 95207 

Tel: (209) 472-7700 

Fax: (209) 472-7986 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Stockton East Water District 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT, 

a California irrigation district, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

CARLOS GUTIERREZ, in his official capacity 

as Secretary of Commerce, et al., 

 Defendants, 

 and 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNCIL OF 

FEDERATION OF FLY FISHERS, et al., 

 Defendant-Intervenors. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: CIV-F-02-6553 OWW DLB 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT, VACATING LISTING 

DECISION, AND DIRECTING 

ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR 

PLAINTIFFS

On December 11, 2002, Plaintiffs Modesto Irrigation District, Turlock Irrigation District, 

Merced Irrigation District, Oakdale Irrigation District, South San Joaquin Irrigation District and 

Stockton East Water District (“Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive 

Relief against Defendants Carlos Gutierrez in his official capacity as Secretary of Commerce 

(previously Donald Evans), National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”), Dr. William T. 

Hogarth in his official capacity as Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, D. Robert Lohn in his official capacity as Regional Administrator, Northwest 

Region National Marine Fisheries Service, and Rodney McInnis in his official capacity as Acting 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:02-cv-06553-OWW -DLB Document 112 Filed 05/18/06 Page 1 of 5
-2- 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, 

VACATING LISTING DECISION, AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS 

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

Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, National Marine Fisheries Service (“Defendants”) 

seeking to declare as invalid, and set aside, Defendant’s listing of Central Valley Steelhead 

(naturally spawning, anadromous populations of Oncorhynchus Mykiss (hereinafter O. mykiss)) 

as threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. The Final Rule 

challenged in the case was issued on March 19, 1998 (63 Fed. Reg. 13347) (hereinafter “Listing 

Decision”). Plaintiffs challenged the Listing Decision based on Defendants’ failure to include 

resident and hatchery populations of Central Valley O. mykiss. 

On May 6, 2003, this Court granted the request for intervention of Defendant-IntervenorApplicants Northern California Council of Federation of Fly Fishers, Federation of Fly Fishers, 

Delta Fly Fishers, Woodbridge Rivers Company, Trout Unlimited, Center for Biological 

Diversity, and Pacific Rivers Council. 

On December 18, 2003, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to 

Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs motion requested that the Court rule, 

as a matter of law, that the Listing Decision was unlawful due to its listing of only a portion of 

the Central Valley O. mykiss distinct population segment, in accordance with Alsea Valley 

Alliance v. Evans, 161 F.Supp.2d 1154, 1162 (D. Or. 2001), appeal dismissed by Alsea Valley

Alliance v. Department of Commerce, 358 F.3d 1181, (9th Cir.(Or.) Feb 24, 2004). Defendants 

admitted that the Listing Decision was legally flawed with respect it its treatment of hatchery 

populations, but requested that the listing remain in place pending NMFS’ reconsideration of the 

decision, and its underlying listing policies. Defendant-Intervenor-Applicants opposed the 

motion, but in the alternative, asked that the Listing Decision remain in place pending agency 

review and reconsideration. 

On April 12, 2004, this Court issued its Memorandum Decision and Order on Plaintiffs’ 

Motion for Summary Judgment (Exhibit A hereto). The Order (granted Plaintiffs motion for 

summary judgment as to admitted flaws in the Listing Decision relating to natural-spawned and 

hatchery spawned Central Valley steelhead classifications, and (2) granted Defendants and 

Intervenors’ request to Stay the Order upon certain terms and conditions. The Order concluded 

that if Defendants remand and review of the Listing Decision is not completed, and a lawful 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:02-cv-06553-OWW -DLB Document 112 Filed 05/18/06 Page 2 of 5
-3- 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, 

VACATING LISTING DECISION, AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS 

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

promulgation of the listing is not completed, on or before June 11, 2005, Defendants shall show 

cause, if any they have, on July 11, 2005 why the listing should not be vacated as unlawful. 

Defendants did not complete remand and review of the Listing Decision by June 11, 

2005. Instead, Defendants requested two extensions of the stay. On February 14, 2005, this 

Court granted Defendant’s request for an extension of the stay of the April 2004 Order from June 

11, 2005 to June 14, 2005, based on Defendant’s expectation that a revised final listing 

determination would be completed by June 14, 2005. On September 12, 2005, this Court granted 

Defendant’s second request such that the say was extended through December 14, 2005. (Exhibit 

B hereto). This Court’s September 12, 2005 Order stated that the Listing Decision would remain 

in effect through December 14, 2005 and that if Defendants had not finalized the new listing by 

that date, they bore the burden to move this Court for any further extension or other relief. 

Defendants did not finalize the new listing by December 14, 2005 and did not move this 

Court for any further extension of the stay or other relief, nor was any such relief granted. 

Rather, Defendants promulgated a new listing decision on December 23, 2005, which was 

published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2006 (71 FR 834), and shall take effect on 

February 6, 2006. 

Therefore, based on this Court’s Orders of April 12, 2004 and September 12, 2005, the 

Listing Decision at issue in this case is vacated, and of no force and effect. 

Plaintiffs are free to challenge the new listing decision promulgated by Defendants to the 

extent it does not address the concerns raised in this litigation and in comments filed with 

Defendants by Plaintiffs and others in the administrative proceedings leading up to the new 

listing decision. The parties agree that the new case, which is to be filed in the Eastern District 

of California, Fresno Division, is a related case to case number 1:02-cv-6553 OWW DLB and to 

conserve judicial resources, to achieve economy, and to avoid duplication and potential 

inconsistency, that the new case shall be related to case number 1:02-cv-6553 OWW DLB. 

The parties further agree that the Defendant-Intervenors, Northern California Council of 

Federation of Fly Fishers, Federation of Fly Fishers, Delta Fly Fishers, Woodbridge Rivers 

Company, Trout Unlimited, the Center for Biological Diversity and Pacific Rivers Council shall 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:02-cv-06553-OWW -DLB Document 112 Filed 05/18/06 Page 3 of 5
-4- 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, 

VACATING LISTING DECISION, AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS 

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

be granted intervention status in the new case without further motion or order and that Pacific 

Legal Foundation shall be granted amicus status in the new case without further motion or order. 

As successful parties in an action brought pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, 16 

U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., this Court will entertain plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys fees and costs. 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment is 

Granted and the Listing Decision is Vacated. 

THE CLERK OF THE COURT IS DIRECTED TO ENTER JUDGMENT FOR 

PLAINTIFFS. 

DATED:__May 12________, 2006 

 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER____________ 

 Oliver W. Wanger 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:02-cv-06553-OWW -DLB Document 112 Filed 05/18/06 Page 4 of 5
-5- 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, 

VACATING LISTING DECISION, AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS 

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

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:02-cv-06553-OWW -DLB Document 112 Filed 05/18/06 Page 5 of 5