UNI TED STATES DI STRI CT COURT FOR THE DI STRI CT OF COLUMBIA

_________________________________________ ) OCEANA, I

NC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0041 ( PL F) ) PENNY PRI TZ KER, ) Secre tary , United States Depa rtment of ) Commerce, e t al., ) ) Def endants. )

1 __________________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON AND ORDER This matter is befor e the Court on def endants’ third motion to stay all proce eding s in this case until J anuar

y 10, 2014. Plaintiff opposes the motion, and defe ndants have filed a reply in further support of their motion. The Court will g rant the motion and will stay all proce eding s in this case through J anuar y 10, 2014. Def endants a ssert that the biolog ical opinions that plaintiff cha lleng es in this case soon will be replac ed and supe rsede d by a new compre hensive biolog ical opinion that will make briefingand dec ision on any challeng e to the cur

rent biolog ical opinions moot. They have repr esente d that the National Ma rine F isheries Servic e (“NMFS”) has published its draft compre hensive biolog ical opinion and has r ece ived public comment. The ag ency now nee ds additional time to review those public c omments and revise its draft biolog ical opinion as

The Court has substituted as the lea d defe ndant Penny Pritz ker, the curr ent 1 Secre tary of Commerce , for f

ormer A ctingSecre tary

Dr. Rebe cca

Bla nk under Rule 25( d) of the Fe dera l Rules of Civil Procedur e.appropr iate. NMF S ex pects to complete the new biolog ical opinion by J anuar y 10, 2014. Once that new biolog ical opinion is complete, it will replace and super sede a ll of the old biologica l opinions challeng ed in this case, a nd NMFS re prese nts that those old opinions will be rende red null and void. The def

endants a rgue that without the re quested e x tension, NMFS staff that would otherwise be completingthe new biolog ical opinion will have to be diver ted to compile administrative re cords f

or the old biolog ical opinions that are about to be super seded. Such a result would ca

use a significant wa ste of judicial and pa rty resour ces. In view of the se re prese ntations, and despite plaintiff’ s strongopposition t o any stay , it appear s to the Court that a stay throug h J anuar

y 10, 2014 will conserve the re source s of both the Court and counse l. Counsel will notneed to f ocus on biolog ical opinions that will be superse ded, and the Court will be able to addr ess only the matters truly

at issue. See, e .g ., Rio Gra nde Silvery

Minnow v. Bur eau of

Reclamation, 601 F.3d 1096, 1113-14 (10th Cir. 2010); Americ an Rivers v. National Marine F isheries Serv., 126 F .3d 1118, 1124 (9th Cir. 1997); see also National Wildli fe F ed’n v. EPA, 925 F .2d 470, 472 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (stay ing c ase to a llow ag ency to complete new

rulemakingon g round of c onservation of judicial resourc es bec ause ag ency action “c arr ied the prospe ct of mooting. . . proce dural attacks and of chang ing the substance to be revie wed” ). Ac cording ly , and for the fore g oing r easons, it is here by ORDERED that def

endants’ motion to stay

proce eding s [Dkt. No. 27] is GRANTED; it is

FURTHE R ORDERED that this case is stayed in its entirety throug h J anuar

y 10, 2014; and it is

2FURTHE R ORDERED that the parties the rea fter sha ll meet and conf er a nd, on or befor e January

28, 2014, shall file a pr oposed sche dule settinga date for the pr oduction of the administrative re cord a

nd a re asonable briefingschedule for the c onsideration of dispositive motions. No further e x tensions of time will be g rante d except for e x ceptional c ause.

SO ORDERED.
/s/_____________________________ PAULL . FRI EDMAN DATE: Nove mber 27, 2013 United States District J udg e

3