Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-04736/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-04736-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 16:1538 Endangered Species 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

 This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited.

Case No. C 04-4736 JF

ORDER DEFERRING RULING ON MOTION TO ENFORCE AND SETTING SCHEDULE FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING

(JFLC1)

**E-Filed 1/9/06**

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

 v.

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case Number C 04-4736 JF

ORDER1 DEFERRING RULING ON

MOTION TO ENFORCE AND

SETTING SCHEDULE FOR

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING

On November 28, 2005, Plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity and California Native

Plant Society filed a motion to enforce this Court’s order of October 28, 2005. Defendants

Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) and Mike Pool, State Director of the BLM for California,

oppose the motion. Intervenors Salinas Ramblers et al. join in Defendants’ opposition. The

Court heard oral argument on January 6, 2006.

At oral argument, Defendants represented to the Court that the Record of Decision

(“ROD”) implementing the 2005 Biological Opinion (“2005 BO”) will be issued on January 13,

2006. Defendants represented that the issuance of the new ROD will have the effect of reducing

Case 5:04-cv-04736-JF Document 128 Filed 01/09/06 Page 1 of 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

2

Case No. C 04-4736 JF

ORDER DEFERRING RULING ON MOTION TO ENFORCE AND SETTING SCHEDULE FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING

(JFLC1)

open routes and barrens to only those that are currently signed open, which will significantly

reduce the miles of open routes and acres of open barrens. Relying on these representations, the

Court will defer ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion to enforce until both the Court and the parties have

had an opportunity to review and comment on the ROD. 

Plaintiffs filed the above-entitled action on November 9, 2004, alleging two claims for

relief against Defendants. As framed originally, these claims were (1) that Defendants are

violating the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) by failing to reinitiate consultation, and (2) that

Defendants are violating the ESA because their management of the Clear Creek Management

Area (“CCMA”) jeopardizes the San Benito evening-primrose (“evening-primrose”). On March

28, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment. On April 29, 2005, Defendants filed a

cross-motion for summary judgment. On July 15, 2005, the Court issued an order stating that it

would defer ruling on the motions for summary judgment until after the Fish and Wildlife

Service (“FWS”) issued an anticipated BO evaluating the effect of BLM’s management of

CCMA on the evening-primrose. On September 2, 2005, FWS issued the anticipated 2005 BO. 

Plaintiffs and Defendants subsequently filed supplemental briefs discussing the impact of the

2005 BO on the pending motions for summary judgment. On September 16, 2005, Plaintiffs

filed a motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint raising certain objections to the 2005

BO. On October 4, 2005, the Court issued an order dismissing Plaintiffs’ first claim as moot,

deferring determination of Plaintiffs’ second claim, and granting Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to

file a supplemental complaint. 

The motions for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ second claim are scheduled for hearing

at 9:00 a.m. on February 24, 2006. At that time, the Court will consider what impact the

issuance of the ROD based on the 2005 BO, which Defendants have represented will occur by

January 13, 2006, has on Plaintiffs’ second claim. Parties shall submit supplemental briefing on

this issue in accordance with the following briefing schedule. Plaintiffs shall submit an opening

brief not later than January 27, 2006. Defendants shall submit an opposition brief, and

Intervenors may submit such brief as they deem appropriate, not later than February 10, 2006. 

Case 5:04-cv-04736-JF Document 128 Filed 01/09/06 Page 2 of 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

3

Case No. C 04-4736 JF

ORDER DEFERRING RULING ON MOTION TO ENFORCE AND SETTING SCHEDULE FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING

(JFLC1)

Plaintiffs shall submit a reply brief not later than February 17, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 9, 2006

/s/ electronic signature authorized 

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 5:04-cv-04736-JF Document 128 Filed 01/09/06 Page 3 of 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

4

Case No. C 04-4736 JF

ORDER DEFERRING RULING ON MOTION TO ENFORCE AND SETTING SCHEDULE FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING

(JFLC1)

This Order has been served upon the following persons:

Michael Richard Eitel michael.eitel@usdoj.gov, wanda.davis@usdoj.gov;

lisa.russell@usdoj.gov

Michael W. Graf mwgraf@aol.com,

Brian Litmans litmans@worldnet.att.net

Lisa Lynne Russell lisa.russell@usdoj.gov, deshonda.young@usdoj.gov

Paul Andrew Turcke pat@msbtlaw.com 

Case 5:04-cv-04736-JF Document 128 Filed 01/09/06 Page 4 of 4