Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Northern California River Watch v. Sausalito-Marin City Sanitary Dist.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


July 21, 2008

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH, A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SAUSALITO-MARIN CITY SANITARY DISTRICT AND DOES 1-10, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joseph C. Spero US Northern District Magistrate Judge

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO ANSWER, COMPLY WITH FRCP RULE 26 AND CONTINUANCE OF INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

WHEREAS, on July 5, 2007, Northern California River Watch ("River Watch") provided the Sausalito-Marin City Sanitary District ("District") with a 60-Day Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suite ("60-Day Notice Letter");

WHEREAS, on April 15, 2008 the Complaint was filed with the Northern District;

WHEREAS, the Parties have met through numerous settlement discussions since July 2007;

WHEREAS, the Parties have reached an agreement to settle which has been approved by the District Board of Directors and River Watch;

WHEREAS, the Parties desire to execute the Settlement Agreement and obtain a dismissal of the lawsuit filed on April 15, 2008 by River Watch assigned to Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero, United States District Court, Northern District Case No. CV08-2097 JCS with prejudice, which Settlement Agreement does not require court approval or request continuing jurisdiction of the Court;

WHEREAS, the Parties received on Friday, July 18, 2008, a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") suggesting DOJ interest in this matter and resolution thereof;

WHEREAS, the Parties seek to address this inquiry from the DOJ, but are not seeking formal review or approval of a the Settlement Agreement as the Parties do not seek a consent judgment under the Clean Water Act;

WHEREAS, the DOJ may disagree with the Parties position and insist on use of the statutory forty-five (45) day period to review the Settlement Agreement or may request modifications to the Settlement Agreement;

WHEREAS, the District seeks to not file an answer in light of the Settlement Agreement, nor do the Parties believe formal compliance with FRCP Rule 26 disclosure or the conduct of a case management conference are required at this time;

WHEREAS, the Answer to the Complaint is due today, July 21, 2008 pursuant to Stipulation and additional court dates are pending, including: August 1, 2008 Last day to comply with FRCP Rule 26; and August 8, 2008 Date of Initial Case Management Conference;

THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate to an extension of time of fifty (50) days in which to file an Answer and comply with Rule 26 disclosures, and further request the Court to reschedule the initial case management conference to a time after the fifty (50) day extension period.

IT IS SO ORDERED:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stipulation is GRANTED. The last day to comply with Rule 26 disclosures is October 10, 2008. The initial case management conference has been continued to October 17, 2008, at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20080721

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.