STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER – Case No. S-04-0956 DFL JFM

[24658-0021 /04cv956.o.stay.DOC] 

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 

Deborah A. Sivas (CSB # 135446) 

EARTHJUSTICE 

Owen House – 553 Salvatierra Walk 

Stanford, California 94305-8620 

Telephone: (650) 723-0325 

(Attorneys for Plaintiffs) 

McGregor W. Scott, United States Attorney 

E. Robert Wright, Assistant U.S. Attorney 

501 "I" Street, Suite 10-100 

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 554-2702 

(Attorneys for Federal Defendants) 

Robert A. Maynard (Idaho Bar No. 5537) 

Richard W. Oehler (Washington Bar No. 17267) 

Perkins Coie LLP 

251 East Front Street, Suite 400 

Boise, Idaho 83702 

Telephone: (208) 343-3434 

Jeffery D. Harris (CSB # 166978) 

Ellison, Schneider & Harris L.L.P. 

2015 H. Street 

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 447-2166 

(Attorneys for Calpine Corporation) 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PIT RIVER TRIBE; NATIVE COALITION 

FOR MEDICINE LAKE HIGHLANDS 

DEFENSE; and MOUNT SHASTA 

BIOREGIONAL ECOLOGY CENTER, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

NO. CIV. S-04-0956 DFL JFM 

STIPULATION TO STAY CASE 

PENDING RESOLUTION OF 

RELATED CASE APPELLATE 

PROCEEDINGS AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER

Case 2:04-cv-00956-JAM-AC Document 29 Filed 07/25/05 Page 1 of 6
STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER – Case No. S-04-0956 DFL JFM - 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 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT; 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR; and CALPINE 

CORPORATION, 

Defendants. 

WHEREAS Plaintiffs in this case have challenged the legality of the May 1998 extensions 

for certain geothermal leases entered into between the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) and 

Calpine Corporation (“Calpine”) pursuant to the Geothermal Steam Act, the National 

Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and the federal government’s 

fiduciary trust obligations to Indian Tribes, as set forth more specifically in Plaintiffs’ Complaint for 

Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief (hereinafter Pit River Tribe II); 

WHEREAS Defendants have denied any and all liability for Plaintiffs’ claims in this action; 

WHEREAS the Court previously concluded that the present case, Pit River Tribe II, is 

related to Pit River Tribe v. U.S. Forest Service, Case No. Civ. S-02-1314 DFL JFM, 306 

F.Supp.2d 929 (2004), appeal pending, Ninth Circuit Case No. 04-15746 (hereinafter Pit River 

Tribe I); 

WHEREAS resolution against Plaintiffs of the legal claims at issue in Pit River Tribe I, 

Ninth Circuit Case No. 04-15746, with respect to the May 1998 geothermal lease extension 

decision challenged in Pit River Tribe I is likely to be dispositive of the legal claims at issue in Pit 

River Tribe II; 

WHEREAS the appeal in Pit River Tribe I, Ninth Circuit Case No. 04-15746, is fully 

briefed and awaiting argument; 

WHEREAS the parties desire to fully preserve their rights and remedies in this matter, 

except as expressly provided herein, while simultaneously promoting judicial economy and avoiding 

unnecessary litigation; 

THEREFORE the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows and jointly request that the 

Court enter an order incorporating this agreement: 

1. This case shall be stayed in its entirety pending issuance of a final decision by the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Pit River Tribe I, Case No. 04-15746, or until January 1, 2007, 

Case 2:04-cv-00956-JAM-AC Document 29 Filed 07/25/05 Page 2 of 6
STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER – Case No. S-04-0956 DFL JFM - 3 

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 

whichever is earlier. "Final decision" shall include the resolution of any timely petitions for 

rehearing by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals by any party, but shall not include any petition for 

certiorari review or other further appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

2. If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issues a final decision as defined above in Pit 

River Tribe I, Case No. 04-15746, that affirms, and does not reverse or remand in whole or part, 

the District Court’s grant of summary judgment with respect to the May 1998 lease extension 

decision at issue in that case, Plaintiffs agree to dismiss with prejudice this case, Pit River Tribe II, 

in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 and, upon issuance of the final Ninth 

Circuit decision, expeditiously to seek an order from the Court dismissing this action with prejudice 

pursuant to this stipulation, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1. In the event of such dismissal, 

all parties shall deem the dismissal an adjudication of the merits of all of Plaintiffs' claims in Pit 

River Tribe II, and shall bear their own costs and fees in this case. 

3. If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses or remands in whole or part the 

District Court’s grant of summary judgment with respect to the May 1998 lease extension decision 

at issue in Pit River Tribe I, Case No. 04-15746, the parties shall agree to a reasonably expedited 

briefing schedule for summary judgment or other resolution of the present case, Pit River Tribe II, 

as appropriate, unless the parties agree otherwise at that time. 

4. Nothing in this stipulation in any way prohibits, waives or precludes Defendants’ 

ability to proceed with construction of the Telephone Flat Geothermal Development Project or 

other activity on or with respect to the leases at issue in Pit River Tribe II, or Plaintiffs’ right to 

seek preliminary injunctive relief from the Court to enjoin such activity during the duration of the 

stay. 

5. Nothing in this stipulation or any subsequent dismissal of the claims in Pit River 

Tribe II pursuant to this stipulation in any way prohibits, waives or precludes any other claims that 

Plaintiffs may have arising out of any other facts, transactions, or causes of action, including, but 

not limited to, any other claims related to or arising out of Federal Defendants’ approval of the 

Telephone Flat Geothermal Development Project or any subsequent approval of activity on the 

leases at issue in this case. Nothing in this stipulation or any subsequent dismissal of the claims in 

Case 2:04-cv-00956-JAM-AC Document 29 Filed 07/25/05 Page 3 of 6
STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER – Case No. S-04-0956 DFL JFM - 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 

Pit River Tribe II pursuant to this stipulation in any way prohibits, waives or precludes any defenses 

that Defendants may have to such other claims. 

Case 2:04-cv-00956-JAM-AC Document 29 Filed 07/25/05 Page 4 of 6
STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER – Case No. S-04-0956 DFL JFM - 5 

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 

 Respectfully submitted: 

DATED: July 21, 2005. 

/s/Deborah A. Sivas 

DEBORAH A. SIVAS 

EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DATED: July 21, 2005. 

JOHN K. VINCENT, United States Attorney 

By /s/E. Robert Wright 

E. ROBERT WRIGHT 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

Attorneys for the Federal Defendants 

DATED: July 21, 2005 

By /s/Robert A. Maynard 

ROBERT A. MAYNARD, pro hac vice 

RICHARD W. OEHLER, pro hac vice 

Perkins Coie LLP 

JEFFERY D. HARRIS 

Ellison, Schneider & Harris L.L.P. 

Attorneys for Defendant Calpine Corporation 

Pursuant to the above Stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 7/22/2005 ________/s/ David F. Levi____________________ 

 THE HONORABLE DAVID F. LEVI 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:04-cv-00956-JAM-AC Document 29 Filed 07/25/05 Page 5 of 6
STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER – Case No. S-04-0956 DFL JFM - 6 

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 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that he is an employee of Perkins Coie LLP and is a person 

of such age and discretion to be competent to serve papers. 

That on July 21, 2005, he electronically filed: 

STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING RESOLUTION 

OF RELATED CASE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER WITH ATTACHED EXHIBIT 1 

with the Clerk of the court using the CM/ECF system which sent a Notice of Electronic Filing to 

the following persons: 

Jeffery D. Harris 

Robert A. Maynard 

Richard W. Oehler 

Deborah A. Sivas 

E. Robert Wright 

And, placing a copy in a postpaid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter named, at the 

place(s) and address(es) stated below, which is/are the last known address(es), and by depositing 

said envelope and contents in the United States Mail at Boise, Idaho in accordance with the Rules 

of Procedure, to the following non-CM/ECF Registered Participant(s): 

Addressee(s): 

None 

 /s/Robert A. Maynard 

 

Case 2:04-cv-00956-JAM-AC Document 29 Filed 07/25/05 Page 6 of 6