Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-05472/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-05472-1/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VENTANA WILDERNESS ALLIANCE,

et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. C 06-5472 PJH

v. ORDER CONTINUING

HEARING ON MOTION

JOHN BRADFORD, in his official capacity TO STRIKE

as MONTEREY DISTRICT RANGER, 

et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

Before the court is defendants’ Motion to Strike Declarations Filed by Plaintiffs, filed

on January 30, 2007. The motion seeks an order striking several declarations, exhibits,

and other purportedly “extra-record” materials submitted by plaintiffs in connection with

their earlier-filed motion for summary judgment. Defendants’ motion to strike has been

noticed for a hearing date of March 7, 2007, while the parties’ cross-motions for summary

judgment are currently set for hearing on April 4, 2007. 

 The court would prefer to consider any objections to plaintiffs’ submission of

evidence outside the administrative record in conjunction with the hearing on plaintiffs’

motion for summary judgment. This way, there will be a context for understanding plaintiffs’

purported need for the evidence. Accordingly, the court hereby CONTINUES, sua sponte,

the hearing on defendant’s motion to strike, until April 4, 2007, at 9:00 a.m., in Courtroom

3, 17th Floor, Federal Building, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102. 

Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to strike, and defendants’ reply in support thereof, shall

be due on March 14 and March 21, 2007, respectively.

The court notes, however, that it is plaintiff’s burden to establish the admissibility of

Case 4:06-cv-05472-PJH Document 23 Filed 02/01/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

outside evidence on an administrative record review. If plaintiffs fail to do so, the evidence

will be stricken. If plaintiffs succeed, the evidence will be considered by the court, and

defendants will be afforded an opportunity to submit their own appropriate outside

evidence. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 1, 2007 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-05472-PJH Document 23 Filed 02/01/07 Page 2 of 2