Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands v. Patricia Grantham

March 14, 2012

KLAMATH SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER AND KLAMATH FOREST ALLIANCE,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
PATRICIA GRANTHAM, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, JR United States District Judge

STIPULATION FOR MODIFICATION TO PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; AMENDED ORDER THEREON

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and Civil Local Rule 143, the parties hereby jointly and respectfully submit this stipulation requesting a modification to the Court's pretrial scheduling order. As described further below, the parties request that the Court modify the briefing schedule and hearing date for the parties' summary judgment motions, allow defendants to lodge a supplement to the administrative record, and allow briefing on a motion by plaintiffs to further augment the record with additional documents.

RECITALS

1. On January 25, 2012, counsel for plaintiffs sent a letter to counsel for defendants describing documents which plaintiffs contend should have been included in the administrative record or which appear in the administrative record in incomplete form.

2. On February 10, 2012, counsel for defendants responded by letter indicating that defendants would agree to lodge approximately 12 documents to correct or supplement the administrative record but that defendants objected to the lodging of approximately eight other documents identified by plaintiffs. Defendants indicated that they would need until approximately the last week of February/first week of March to compile the documents, prepare an amended index to the record, and copy the documents and prepare new DVDs for the parties and Court.

3. Concurrent with their motion for summary judgment, plaintiffs agreed to file a motion to augment the administrative record regarding any of the few disputed documents on which they may seek to rely.

4. Under the current Pretrial Scheduling Order, plaintiffs' opening brief on summary judgment is due on Friday, February 24, 2012. While defendants have agreed that several documents may be lodged to correct or supplement the administrative record, they need approximately two weeks to accomplish this task, and they will not be able to finalize and lodge the supplemental record with the Court before plaintiffs' opening brief is due under the current schedule. Under the circumstances, the parties believe that good cause exists for modification of the Court's Pretrial Scheduling Order.

5. The parties have agreed to a revised schedule for their cross-motions for summary judgment motions, and they jointly request that the Court modify the deadlines set in Section V of the Pretrial Scheduling Order as set forth in the table below:

Briefing Schedule

Defendants Lodge Agreed Supplement to Record 03/02/2012

Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment 03/16/2012

Defendants' Consolidated Opposition/Cross-Motion 05/25/2012

Plaintiffs' Consolidated Reply/Opposition 06/22/2012

Defendants' Reply 07/20/2012

Hearing on Cross-Motions ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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