Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_88-cv-01658/USCOURTS-caed-2_88-cv-01658-22/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:4332 Environmental Policy - Coop of Agency Reports

---

GREGORY K. WILKINSON, Bar No. 054809

JAMES E. THOMPSON, Bar No. 041598

JENNIFER T. BUCKMAN, Bar No. 179143

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1650

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 325-4000

Telecopier: (916) 325-4010

E-Mail: gregory.wilkinson@bbklaw.com

E-Mail: james.thompson@bbklaw.com

E-Mail: jennifer.buckman@bbklaw.com

Attorneys for Friant Defendants

[Counsel of record listed on Appendix A]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE

COUNCIL, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

KIRK RODGERS, a Regional Director of

the UNITED STATES BUREAU OF

RECLAMATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. S-88-1658-LKK/GGH

STIPULATION REGARDING SUBPOENA

FOR DOCUMENTS IN A CIVIL CASE

SERVED UPON NON-PARTY THE

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH

& GAME; ORDER

Judge: Hon. Gregory G. Hollows

ORANGE COVE IRRIGATION

DISTRICT, et al.,

Defendants-Intervenors.

Case 2:88-cv-01658-JAM-GGH Document 1264 Filed 11/02/05 Page 1 of 3
The California Department of Fish and Game (“Department”) and Defendant

Friant Water Users Authority ("Friant") hereby stipulate as follows:

1. Friant has served a subpoena duces tecum on the Department in the case

of Natural Resources Defense Council v. Rodgers, CIV–S-88- 1658 LKK/GGH. The

Department is not a party to the litigation.

2. The Department has expressed concern that the volume of documents

potentially responsive to the subpoenas is extensive. The Department has therefore

asked, and Friant has agreed, to attempt to narrow the scope of the document requests. 

Friant and the Department have agreed that their counsel will meet to accomplish this task.

3. Friant and the Department have agreed that the time for the Department to

respond to the subpoena shall be extended and the Department does not have to respond

to the subpoena by the dates indicated on the documents. Friant and the Department have

agreed that a new response date will be set after counsel meet and confer. Friant will

make a reasonable attempt to accommodate the Department's request for more time,

within the constraints imposed by the December discovery cutoff dates.

4. The parties agree that the Department's time for objecting to the subpoena,

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(2)(B), filing a motion for protective

order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b), or filing a motion to quash or

modify the subpoena pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(3)(A) is likewise

extended.

Dated: October 26, 2005

BEST BEST & KRIEGER

By: /s/ Jennifer T. Buckman

Jennifer T. Buckman

Attorneys for Friant Defendants

Case 2:88-cv-01658-JAM-GGH Document 1264 Filed 11/02/05 Page 2 of 3
Dated: October 26, 2005

BILL LOCKYER, Attorney General

of the State of California

By:_/s/ Gary Tavetian

 Gary Tavetian, Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for California Department of

Fish and Game

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 11/01/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

_____________________________

 Honorable Gregory G. Hollows

 United States Magistrate Judge

NRDC1658.ord4

Case 2:88-cv-01658-JAM-GGH Document 1264 Filed 11/02/05 Page 3 of 3