UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 28, 2009
STOCKTON EAST WATER DISTRICT, PLAINTIFFS,
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Hon. Oliver W. Wanger
STIPULATION TO ADD CASE TO FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE Hearing: August 31, 2009 et al., Time: 10:00 A.M. Ctrm: 3 Judge: Hon. Oliver W. Wanger
On July 29, 2009, Federal Defendants moved to consolidate the above-captioned case and San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority et al. v. Locke et al. ("San Luis"), No. 1:09-CV-1053-OWW-DLB. See Docket No. 26. Plaintiffs filed a statement of non-opposition on August 12, 2009. See Docket No. 26.
On August 6, 2009, a new case was filed challenging the NMFS 2009 biological opinion, the same agency action at issue in the above-captioned case and the San Luis cases. See State Water Contractors v. Locke, et al., No. 1:09-CV-1378-OWW-SMS. On August 12, 2009, the State Water Contractors filed a Notice of Related Case, stating that their challenge is related to the above-captioned case because the challenges "both involve the same parties (Defendants); both cases are based on the same and similar claims (Defendants' violations of the ESA and other laws in preparing, approving and enforcing the 2009 OCAP BiOp); both cases involve the same transaction or event (Defendants' preparation, approval and enforcement of the 2009 OCAP BiOp); and both cases involve similar questions of fact and law such that their assignment to the same Judge is likely to effect a substantial savings of judicial effort." See State Water Contractors v. Locke, No. 1:09-CV-1378, Docket No. 11-2 at 9. The same arguments are raised with respect to the relationship between the State Water Contractors case and the San Luis case.
Id. at 8.
Federal Defendants agree with the statements in the State Water Contractors' Notice of Related Case and assert that this challenge meets the consolidation factors outlined in our Motion to Consolidate. As with consolidation of the cases named in our Motion, the Plaintiffs in all three cases "agree that some consolidation of the matters is desirable." See San Luis, Docket No. 29 at 1. In this regard, the State Water Contractors Plaintiff is concerned that while "some consolidation" is appropriate, the issues raised in each of the cases are individual to those cases and that a wholesale merger of the actions is inappropriate. Accordingly, Plaintiff believes any consolidation Order must not prejudice the State Water Contractors' substantive or procedural rights, including their right to file separate briefs and make separate arguments in support of their case. Plaintiff joins in the Response to Federal Defendants' Motion to Consolidate heretofore filed by Plaintiffs San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District. See San Luis, Docket No. 29.
Accordingly, the parties in all three matters hereby stipulate that the State Water Contractors case be added to Federal Defendants' Motion to Consolidate, set for hearing on August 31, 2009, and that the State Water Contractors case management conference be advanced to the date and time set for the case management conferences in the San Luis and Stockton East cases (September 10, 2009, 8:15 A.M.).
IT IS SO ORDERED
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 20th day of August, 2009, I filed a true and correct copy of the foregoing Stipulation to Add Case to Federal Defendants' Motion to Consolidate with the Court' CM/ECF system, which will generate a Notice of Filing on the following: Jennifer L. Spaletta firstname.lastname@example.org Alexis Keane Galbraith email@example.com Jeanne M. Zolezzi firstname.lastname@example.org Karna E. Harrigfeld email@example.com Stockton East Water District firstname.lastname@example.org
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.