UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
May 14, 2012
HOPLAND BAND OF POMO INDIANS, ET AL.,
KEN SALAZAR, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, TO INCREASE PAGE LIMITS ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Charles R. Breyer
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
ASSOCIATED WITH DEFENDANTS'
ANTICIPATED MOTION TO DISMISS
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-4(b) and 7-12, and for good cause shown, the parties stipulate and request that this Court increase the page limits on motions set by ¶ 5 of its Standing Orders.
See ECF No. 13-2. In support of this stipulation, the parties state as follows:
1. Plaintiffs' complaint raises separate allegations about five federally-recognized Indian tribes. See Compl., ECF No. 1, ¶¶ 24-52. Additionally, plaintiffs' complaint brings nine separate causes of action against defendants, arising under the: (i) Indian Self- Determination and Education Assistance Act ("ISDA"), 25 U.S.C. §§ 450 et seq.; (ii) Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"), 5 U.S.C. §§ 553 & 702; (iii) equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment; and (iv) Indian Trust doctrine. See Compl. ¶¶ 55-113.
2. Pursuant to a stipulation with proposed order, defendants' response to plaintiffs' complaint is due May 23, 2012. See ECF No. 14. In addition to filing an answer to some of plaintiffs' complaint, defendants anticipate moving to dismiss some plaintiffs and to dismiss several causes of action of the remaining plaintiffs.
3. This Court's Standing Orders limits non-summary judgment motions to 15 pages in length, exclusive of title pages, indexes of cases, table of contents, exhibits, affidavits, and summaries of argument, if required. See ECF No. 13-2, ¶ 5. The Civil Local Rules limit briefs or memoranda of points and authorities to no more than 25 pages in length but allow parties to request the Court to increase the page limits. See Civil L.R. 7-4(b).
4. In light of the factual and legal complexity of each of the five plaintiff's allegations and their nine causes of action, and in order to give the parties the ability to adequately support each of their arguments in support of (or in opposition to) defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss, the parties respectfully request that this Court allow defendants to file a memorandum in support of their motion and plaintiffs to file a memorandum in support of their opposition up to 25 page in length, exclusive of title pages, indexes of cases, table of contents, exhibits, affidavits, and summaries of argument. See Civil L.R. 7-4(b). The parties believe that this increase will promote judicial economy.
Accordingly, for good cause shown, this Court should grant the parties' request to file memoranda associated with defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss of up to 25 pages in length, exclusive of title pages, indexes of cases, table of contents, exhibits, affidavits, and summaries of argument, if required.
s/ Lester J. Marston LESTER J. MARSTON RAPPORT AND MARSTON Attorney for Plaintiffs s/ James D. Todd, Jr. JAMES D. TODD, JR. Senior Counsel U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Attorney for Defendants Dated: May 14, 2012 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _5/21/2012 Charles R. Breyer United States District Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, James D. Todd, Jr., hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was this date served upon all counsel of record by electronically filing the foregoing with the Clerk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, using its ECF system, which automatically provides electronic notification to the following:
LESTER J. MARSTON RAPPORT AND MARSTON 405 West Perkins Street Ukiah, CA 95482 email@example.com Attorney for Plaintiffs /s/ James D. Todd, Jr. JAMES D. TODD, JR.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.