The opinion of the court was delivered by: United States District Judge Hon. Edward M. Chen
ANDREA A. TREECE, SB No. 237639 IGNACIA S. MORENO MICHAEL R. SHERWOOD, SB No. 63702 Assistant Attorney General 2 Earthjustice 426 17th Street, 5th Floor 3 Oakland, CA 94612 KEVIN W. McARDLE (D.C. Bar No. Telephone: 415-217-2000 454569) 4 Facsimile: 415-217-2040 United States Department of Justice Attorneys for Plaintiff Environment & Natural Resources Division 5 Wildlife & Marine Resources Section ASHLEY J. REMILLARD (CA-252374) 601 D Street, N.W., Room 3034 6 firstname.lastname@example.org Washington, D.C. 20004 NOSSAMAN LLP 7 Tel: (202) 305-0219 18101 Von Karman Avenue Fax: (202) 305-0275 8 Suite 1800 E-mail: email@example.com Irvine, CA 92612 9 Telephone: (949) 833-7800 RACHEL K. BOWEN (Admitted to the Facsimile: (949) 833-7878 10 Maryland Bar) United States Department of Justice 1 GEORGE J. MANNINA, JR., pro hac vice Environment & Natural Resources Division firstname.lastname@example.org Natural Resources Section 12 NOSSAMAN LLP 601 D Street, N.W., Room 3204 1666 K Street, N.W., Suite 500 13 Washington, D.C. 20004 Washington, D.C. 20006 Tel: (202) 616-4119 14 Telephone: (202) 887-1400 Fax: (202) 305-0506 Facsimile: (202) 466-3215 E-mail: email@example.com 15 11 Attorneys for Proposed Intervenor-Defendants Attorneys for Defendants
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIMES FOR MOTION TO INTERVENE ; ORDER
Plaintiff Oceana ("Plaintiff"), Defendants John E. Bryson, in his official capacity as Secretary of Commerce, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National 3 Marine Fisheries Service ("Federal Defendants"), and Proposed Intervenors California Wetfish 4 Producers Association et al. ("Proposed Intervenors") hereby present, pursuant to Civ. L.R. 6-2, this 5 stipulated request for an order changing time for Plaintiff's response to the motion to intervene, 6 7 Proposed Intervenors' reply, and the hearing on the motion to intervene. In support of this request, 8 the parties present as follows: 9
1. Proposed Intervenors filed a motion to intervene in this case on February 21, 2012, 10 and noticed a hearing date of March 30, 2012. 11
2. Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 7-3, Plaintiff's response to this motion was due by March 6, 2012 and Proposed Intervenors' reply was due by March 13. 13
3. On February 22, 2012, the Court issued a Notice (Docket. No. 18) continuing the 14 hearing on the motion to intervene to April 6, 2012. The Notice also reset the deadline for Plaintiff's 15 response to March 1, 2012 and reset the deadline for Proposed Intervenors' reply to March 8, 2012. 16
4. Plaintiff's counsel has a long-standing prior commitment that conflicts with the April 12 6, 2012 hearing date.
5. Due to the volume of materials submitted by Proposed Intervenors, and Plaintiff's 19 pre-existing deadline to file its Amended Complaint on or before February 29, 2012, Plaintiff needs 20 the normal 14 days allowed by Civ. L. R. 7-3 to assess the motion to intervene and formulate a 21 response to it. 22
6. Federal Defendants take no position on the motion to intervene and do not intend to 23 participate in briefing the motion to intervene. 24
7. Based on the foregoing, the parties propose the following schedule for resolving the 25 motion to intervene, and submit that good cause exists for the Court to approve the proposed 26 schedule: 27 28
a. Plaintiff will file its response to the motion to intervene on or before March 6, 2012.
b. Proposed Intervenors will file their reply regarding the motion to intervene on or before March 13, 2012.
c. The hearing on the motion to intervene will be set for April 20, 2012.
8. Plaintiff and Federal Defendants have stipulated to an extended schedule for the filing 7 of Plaintiff's amended complaint, Defendants' answer, and the lodging and service of the 8 administrative record. Docket No. 11. Approval of the instant stipulated request for an ...