Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02445/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02445-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1345 Property Damage

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES, et 

al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 2:09-cv-2445 JAM-EFB

ORDER 

The Court having considered Defendant Sierra Pacific 

Industries’ (“SPI”) Motion for Partial Stay of Discovery Order (Doc 

#102) and Plaintiff’s Opposition to this Motion (Doc #104), hereby 

issues the following Orders:

1. SPI’s Motion for Partial Stay is GRANTED.

2. SPI shall file its Motion for Reconsideration of 

Magistrate Judge Brennan’s November 16, 2010 Discovery Order (Doc 

#92) (“Motion for Reconsideration”) no later than 5 p.m. on 

Tuesday, November 30, 2010. Plaintiff may, but is not required to,

file a response to SPI’s Motion for Reconsideration no later than 5 

p.m. on Friday, December 3, 2010. Plaintiff’s arguments set forth 

Case 2:09-cv-02445-WBS-AC Document 105 Filed 11/29/10 Page 1 of 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

in its Opposition to SPI’s Motion for Partial Stay will be 

considered by this Court in deciding SPI’s Motion for 

Reconsideration. No reply brief from SPI will be permitted. Also, 

because the issues involved in this discovery dispute have already 

been extensively briefed and argued by the parties (the Court has 

reviewed all these filings as well as the transcript of the 

September 22, 2010 hearing before Magistrate Judge Brennan), the 

briefs in support of and in response to SPI’s Motion for 

Reconsideration may not exceed 10 pages. Each side will also be 

permitted to submit only one declaration in support of or in 

response to the Motion for Reconsideration. No documents which 

have previously been filed may be attached to these declarations. 

As its one declaration, the Court would encourage SPI to file a 

supplemental declaration from Michael Schaps which contains more 

detailed information as to what he did, to whom he spoke, and the 

subject matter of these conversations during the August 10, 2010 

Forest Service public tour.

3. The Court will decide SPI’s Motion for Reconsideration 

without oral argument. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(g). The partial stay of 

Magistrate Brennan’s Order (Doc #92) will remain in effect until 

this Court issues its Order on SPI’s Motion for Reconsideration.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 29, 2010

Case 2:09-cv-02445-WBS-AC Document 105 Filed 11/29/10 Page 2 of 2