Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01053/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01053-41/pdf.json

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

---

Stipulation Re: Summary Judgment 

Page Limits and Schedule Case No. 1:09-cv-1053

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

IGNACIA S. MORENO, Assistant Attorney General

United States Department of Justice

Environment & Natural Resources Division

JACK K. HAUGRUD, Chief

WILLIAM J. SHAPIRO, Trial Attorney (CO Bar No. 30929)

Natural Resources Section

SETH M. BARSKY, Acting Section Chief

BRIDGET KENNEDY McNEIL, Trial Attorney (CO Bar No. 034299)

BRADLEY H. OLIPHANT, Trial Attorney (CA. Bar No. 216468)

Wildlife and Marine Resources Section

Benjamin Franklin Station, P.O. Box 7369

Washington, D.C. 20044-7369

Telephone: (202) 305-0500 / Facsimile: (202) 305-0275

Attorneys for Federal Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

THE CONSOLIDATED SALMONID CASES

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:09-cv-1053-OWW (Lead Case)

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

RE: SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING 

PAGE LIMITS AND MODIFICATION OF 

BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND ORAL 

ARGUMENT DATES

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 470 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 3
Stipulation and Order Re: Summary Judgment 

Page Limits and Schedule 1 Case No. 1:09-cv-1053

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

WHEREAS on July 30, 2010, the Court approved plaintiffs’ requests for relief from the 

25-page limitation for opening briefs and requested that following the submission of opening 

briefs in support of summary judgment, the parties confer and attempt to agree on appropriate 

page limitations for Federal Defendants' and Defendant-Intervenors' responsive briefs, as well as 

page limitations for Plaintiffs' and DWR's reply briefs. If an agreement on page limitations for 

those subsequent briefs could not be reached before August 20, 2010, the Court would conduct a 

hearing on the matter on August 20, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

WHEREAS on August 6, 2010, Plaintiffs filed an opening brief of 120 pages, DWR filed 

an opening brief of 27 pages, and the Stanislaus River Plaintiffs filed on opening brief of 39 

pages. See Docket Nos. 431, 446-1, and 454.

In satisfaction of their duties to meet and confer on subsequent page limitations, the 

parties now hereby stipulate to the following:

1. The parties will be limited to a maximum of 275 pages of briefing, per side, for 

the entire set of briefs, inclusive of the opening briefs already filed. Plaintiffs’ “side” is 

defined for this purpose to include Plaintiff-Intervenor DWR and all other Plaintiffs 

except for the Stanislaus River Plaintiffs1; Defendants’ “side” is defined to include both 

the Federal Defendants and the Defendant-Intervenors. The parties will continue to 

use all efforts to minimize the number of pages actually expended.

2. The Stanislaus River Plaintiffs, Federal Defendants, and Defendant-Intervenors, 

will be allowed 75 pages per side, for the entire set of briefs, inclusive of opening briefs 

already filed relating to Stanislaus River issues. Federal Defendants and DefendantIntervenors are defined as one “side” for purposes of briefing Stanislaus River 

Plaintiffs’ issues. See Docket No. 422.

3. The remaining summary judgment briefing deadlines will be extended as follows:

 

1 The Stanislaus River Plaintiffs include Plaintiffs Stockton East Water District, Oakdale 

Irrigation District, and South San Joaquin Irrigation District.

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 470 Filed 08/20/10 Page 2 of 3
Stipulation and Order Re: Summary Judgment 

Page Limits and Schedule 2 Case No. 1:09-cv-1053

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

a. The deadline for both Federal Defendants and Defendant-Intervenors’ 

cross-motions for summary judgment and supporting materials will be extended 

from September 13, 2010, to September 30, 2010.

b. The deadline for Plaintiffs and Plaintiff-Intervenors’ opposition/reply 

briefs will be extended from October 4, 2010, to October 28, 2010.

c. The deadline for Federal Defendants and Defendant-Intervenors’ reply 

briefs will be extended from October 25, 2010, to November 18, 2010.

d. The oral argument on the cross-motions for summary judgment currently 

set for November 18-19, 2010, will be extended to December 16-17, 2010, or any 

other dates established by the Court.

4. If the Plaintiffs file a motion for temporary restraining order and/or preliminary 

injunction, the moving party will request a status conference within two court days to 

establish a briefing schedule and, if necessary, modification of the schedule above.

For good cause, the above extensions of the page limitations are granted and the modifications to 

the summary judgment schedule shall be made.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 20, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

emm0d64h

Case 1:09-cv-01053-LJO-BAM Document 470 Filed 08/20/10 Page 3 of 3