F OR P UBLICATION



### UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT H CIRCUIT

M AR Y A N N M UR R A Y ; L I G E M. M UR R A Y ,Plaintiffs-Counter-DefendantsA ppellees ,

v
. B EJ M I N E R A L S , L L C; RTW F , L L C, D efendants-Counter-ClaimantsAppellants. N o. 16-35506

D.C. No. 1:14-cv-00106- SPW

OPI NI ON

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Susan P. W atters, District J udg e, Presiding
Submitted En B anc J une 9, 2020 * San F rancisco, California
F iled J une 17, 2020
B efore: Sidney

R. Thomas, Chief J udg e , and Kim McL ane W ardlaw, Marsha S. B erz o n, J ay S. B y bee, Consuelo M. Callahan, Sandra S. Ikuta, Mary H. Murg uia, Morg an Christen, Paul J . W atford, Michelle T. F riedland, and Rya n D. Nelson, Circuit J udg es Opinion by

Chief J udg e Thomas

* T h e p an el u n an im o u s ly

co n clu d es th is case is su itab le f o r d ecisio n w ith o u t o ral arg u

m en t. S ee Fed . R. App . P . 3 4 (a)(2 ).M UR R A Y V

. B EJ M I

N E R A L S 2
SUMMARY * *

Montana Law
The en banc c ourt affirmed the district court’s or d er g ranting summary

judg ment to plaintiffs and declaring them owners of dinosaur fossils discovered on their ranch.
The Monta na Supreme Court accepted a c ertification
r e q u est from the en banc court, answered the certifi e d question, and concluded that dinosaur fossils were not within the “ordinary a

nd natural meaning ” of “ mineral” and, t h u s , belong ed to the sur f

ace estate. The en banc court held that because the plaintiffs were the un d i sputed owners of the surface estate at issue, the Supreme Court’s decision r equired a resolution in their favor.

COUNSEL
Eric D. Miller (arg

u ed), P e rkins Coie L L P, Seattle, W a shing ton; Shane R. Swindle, Perkins Coie L L P, Phoenix , Ariz ona; B rian C. L ake, Perkins Coie L L P, Phoenix , Ariz o na; for Defendants-Counter-Claimants-Appellants.
Harlan B

. Krog h (arg

ued) and E ric Edward Nord, Crist Krog h & Nord PL L C, B illing s, Montana, f or Plaintiffs- C ounterDefendants-Appellees.

** T h is su m m ary co n stitu

t es n o p art o f th e o p in io n o f th e co urt. It h as b eenp rep ared b y

co urt staf

f f o r th e co n v en i en ce o f

th e read er.M UR R A Y V

. B EJ M I

N E R A L S 3 Gary S. Guz y and Pooja S. Kot h a r i , C oving ton & B urling L L P, W ashingt o n , D.C., for A mici Curiae Paleontolog ical Societies and Scientific I

nstitutions. Colleen M. Dowdall, Dowdall L aw, Missoula, Montana, for Amicus Curiae United Property Owners of Montana (UPOM).

OP INION THOMAS, Chief J udg e :
After g ranting rehearing e n banc in M urray v. BEJ Minerals, LLC , 908 F .3d 437 (9th Cir. 2018), see Murray v

. BEJ Minerals , LLC , 920 F .3d 5 83 (9th Cir. 2 0 1 9 ) , we certified the following qu estion, a n issue of first impression under Montana law and dispositive o f the instant case, to the Montana Supreme Court:
W h ether, under Montana law, d inosaur fossils constitute “minerals” for the pur p o s e of a mineral reservation. Murray v. BEJ Minerals , 924 F .3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir. 2 019) (citing Mont. R. App. P. 15).
The Montana Supreme Court g raciously accepted our certification request, Murray v. BEJ M inerals , No. 19-0304, 2019 W L 2383604 (Mont. J une 4, 2019), and then answered our certified question, without modification and on the facts and p roced

u r a l h istory provided in our certification order. See Murray v. BE

J M i n e rals, LLC , 2020 MT 131, ¶¶ 1–3 (Mo n t

. 2020). I t concluded that d inosaur fossils are notM UR R A Y V

. B EJ M I

N E R A L S 4
within the “ordinary and natural meaning ” of “mineral” and, thus, b elong to the surface estate. Id. at ¶ 41. B ecause Mary Ann and L ig e Murray (the “Murray s”) are the u ndisputed
owners of the surface e s t a te here, see Murray , 924 F .3d at 1072, the Supreme Cour t ’ s decision requires a resolution in their favor. According ly , the d istrict court’s order g ranting summary judg ment to the Murray s and declaring them the sole owners of dinosaur fossils discovered o n their r anch, see Murray v

. Billings G arfield Land Co. , 1 87 F

. Supp. 3d 1 2 03, 1204 (D. Mont. 2016), is AF F IRMED

.