Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01703/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01703-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1319 Clean Water 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER 

ALLIANCE,

Plaintiff,

v.

COSUMNES CORPORATION dba 

MURIETA EQUESTRIAN CENTER,

Defendant.

No. 2:20-cv-1703 DB

ORDER

Each of the parties in the above-captioned case has consented to proceed before a United 

States Magistrate Judge. See U.S.C. § 636(c). Accordingly, this matter has been reassigned to 

the undersigned for all purposes. On November 10, 2022, defendant filed a motion to stay and 

noticed the motion for hearing before the undersigned on December 16, 2022. (ECF No. 72.) On 

November 11, 2022, defendant filed an ex parte application for an order shortening time to hear 

the motion to stay. (ECF No. 73.) 

Pursuant to Local Rule 144(e) an application to shorten time shall set forth by affidavit of 

counsel the circumstances justifying the issuances of an order shortening time. “[A]pplications to 

shorten time will not be granted except upon affidavit of counsel showing a satisfactory 

explanation for the need for the issuance of such an order[.]” Local Rule 144(e). 

Case 2:20-cv-01703-SCR Document 74 Filed 11/16/22 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

Here, the affidavit of defense counsel asserts that the parties’ Phase I summary judgment 

motions concerning standing and Water of the United States (“WOTUS”) issues are presently due 

on December 16, 2022. (ECF No. 73-1 at 2.) The WOTUS related issue is expected to be 

impacted by a pending Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 

(Supreme Court Case No. 21-454). Counsel argues that “[i]f the Supreme Court’s ruling changes 

the WOTUS law,” that change may necessitate additional briefing, a motion for reconsideration, 

and/or further oral argument. (ECF No. 73 at 4.) 

Assuming, arguendo, that counsel’s assertion is true the Supreme Court granted cert in 

Sackett on January 24, 2022, and heard oral argument on October 3, 2022. See

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/22grantednotedlist.pdf. Defendant did not file the motion 

to stay until November 10, 2022. (ECF No. 72.) Given the considerable length of time defendant

must have been aware of the issues underlying defendant’s argument, the Court finds defendant 

has failed to show a satisfactory explanation for the need for the issuance of an order shortening 

time to hear defendant’s motion. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s November 11, 2022 ex parte 

application (ECF No. 73) is denied.

Dated: November 15, 2022

DLB:6

DB/orders/orders.consent/coastkeeper1703.short.time.den.ord

Case 2:20-cv-01703-SCR Document 74 Filed 11/16/22 Page 2 of 2