Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00770/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00770-3/pdf.json

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

---

1

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY; 

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE; and LOS 

PADRES FORESTWATCH, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

BERNIE WEINGARDT, Pacific Southwest 

Regional Forester; PEGGY HERNANDEZ, 

Forest Supervisor, Los Padres National Forest; 

ABIGAIL R. KIMBELL, Chief, USDA Forest 

Service; and USDA Forest Service, 

 Defendants. 

 

Case No. 2:07-cv-00770 FCD KJM 

STIPULATION REQUESTING 

MODIFICATION OF STATUS 

(PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) 

ORDER AND STAY OF BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE; ORDER

Plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife and Los Padres Forestwatch 

(collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and defendants Bernie Weingardt, Peggy Hernandez, Abigail R. Kimbell and 

USDA Forest Service (collectively, “Defendants”), hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

Recitals

1. This is an action for judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 

5 U.S.C. §§ 701-706. Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that Defendants violated the National Environmental 

Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., by issuing a decision that makes a portion of the Los Padres 

National Forest available for oil and gas leasing. Defendants deny any statutory violation. 

/// 

MCGREGOR W. SCOTT 

United States Attorney 

LYNN TRINKA ERNCE 

Assistant United States Attorney 

501 I Street, Suite 10-100 

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 554-2720 

Facsimile: (916) 554-2900 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Case 2:07-cv-00770-TLN-KJN Document 17 Filed 01/09/08 Page 1 of 4
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. Pursuant to the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order entered on August 16, 2007 

[Dkt. No. 9], Plaintiffs’ opening brief in this matter is due on or before January 11, 2008. Defendants’ 

consolidated opposition and cross-motion is due on or before February 8, 2008. Plaintiffs’ consolidated 

opposition and reply is due on or before March 7, 2008 and Defendants’ reply brief is due on or before 

April 4, 2008. A hearing on the parties’ motions currently is scheduled for May 9, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. 

3. The Joint Pretrial Scheduling Report filed on July 13, 2007 [Dkt. No. 8], states: 

C. Joinder of Additional Parties

Plaintiffs may seek to add additional parties (e.g., the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service) in connection with claims under the Endangered Species 

Act that may be added after issuance of a new Biological Opinion. 

See paragraph (D). 

D. Amendment of Pleadings

Subsequent to the issuance of the Biological Opinion regarding in this 

matter, certain habitat within the Los Padres National Forest was 

designated as critical habitat. As a result, the formal consultation has been 

reinitiated and is currently in progress. Once the consultation is 

concluded, Fish and Wildlife Service will issue a Biological Opinion. 

At that time, Plaintiffs may seek to amend their Complaint to add claims 

under the Endangered Species Act based on the new Biological Opinion. 

4. Paragraph II of the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order [Dkt. No. 9] states that “No further 

joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been 

shown.” 

5. The reinitiated consultation requested by the Los Padres National Forest remains in 

progress and currently it is anticipated that the Fish and Wildlife Service will issue a new Biological 

Opinion on or about January 31, 2008 – after the deadline for plaintiffs’ opening brief in this case. 

6. Plaintiffs will require time to review and analyze the new Biological Opinion to determine 

whether they will seek leave of Court to amend their original complaint to name additional parties and to 

assert additional claims under the Endangered Species Act based on the new Biological Opinion. 

7. Until Plaintiffs have made a determination about whether to seek to assert additional 

claims or name additional parties in an amended complaint, the parties believe that it is infeasible and 

impractical for them to file their cross-motions according to the schedule set forth in the Status (Pretrial 

Scheduling) Order. 

/// 

Case 2:07-cv-00770-TLN-KJN Document 17 Filed 01/09/08 Page 2 of 4
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 

8. Under the circumstances, the parties believe that good cause exists to modify the Court’s 

Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order as set forth below. 

Stipulation

 WHEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

A. The briefing schedule and the hearing date for the parties’ cross-motions as set forth in the 

Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order shall be vacated and stayed until further order of the Court. 

B. Defendants shall provide Plaintiffs’ counsel with a copy of the new Biological Opinion 

issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service as soon as possible after it has been issued and, in any event, 

no later than 5 business days after issuance of the new Biological Opinion. 

C. As soon as possible after issuance of the new Biological Opinion, Defendants shall file 

a notice informing the Court of the dates on which: (1) the new Biological Opinion was issued; and 

(2) Plaintiffs received the new Biological Opinion. 

D. Plaintiffs shall have 45 calendar days after receipt of the new Biological Opinion to 

determine whether they will seek leave of Court to amend their original complaint to name additional 

parties and assert additional claims under the Endangered Species Act based on the new Biological 

Opinion. 

E. No later than 60 days after their receipt of the new Biological Opinion, Plaintiffs shall file 

with the Court either: (1) a notice stating that Plaintiffs will not seek leave to amend their complaint and a 

proposed new briefing schedule for the cross-motions on the original complaint as agreed to by the 

parties; or (2) a motion for leave to amend their complaint, setting the motion for hearing on the earliest 

possible hearing date. 

F. In the event that Plaintiffs file a motion for leave to amend their complaint, Defendants 

shall file their opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion, as applicable, within the time 

limits specified in Local Rule 78-230. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:07-cv-00770-TLN-KJN Document 17 Filed 01/09/08 Page 3 of 4
4

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 

G. The Court will issue an Amended Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order either: (1) after 

receiving notice that Plaintiffs will not seek leave to amend their original complaint; or (2) if Plaintiffs 

seek leave to amend their complaint, after the Court has ruled upon the motion. 

 Respectfully Submitted, 

Dated: January 7, 2008 McGREGOR W. SCOTT 

 United States Attorney 

 By: /s/ Lynn Trinka Ernce LYNN TRINKA ERNCE 

 Assistant United States Attorney 

 

Dated: January 7, 2008 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, 

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE and 

LOS PADRES FORESTWATCH 

 By: /s/ John T. Buse JOHN T. BUSE 

 LISA BELENKY 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 9, 2008 

Case 2:07-cv-00770-TLN-KJN Document 17 Filed 01/09/08 Page 4 of 4