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.

Conservation Congress v. United States Forest Service

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

August 16, 2013

CONSERVATION CONGRESS, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, Defendants.

James Jay Tutchton (CA State Bar # 150908), Tutchton Law Office, Centennial, CO Marianne Dugan, pro hac vice (OR State Bar # 932563), Eugene, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

Robert G. Dreher, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, Alison D. Garner, DC Bar No. 983858 Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Natural Resources Section Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, D.C., Stuart C. Gillespie, CO Bar No. 42861 Trial Attorney, Natural Resources Section, Washington, D.C., Andrea Gelatt, CA Bar # 262617, Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Wildlife & Marine Resources Section, Washington, D.C., Attorneys for Defendants.

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR ATTORNEY FEE MOTION

WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.

WHEREAS, on June 6, 2013 (Dkt 55), the Court entered an Order:

1) granting plaintiff's motion to defer consideration of its ESA claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d);

2) granting defendant USFS summary judgment on plaintiff's claims regarding the Log Springs and M9 Projects (denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on those projects);

3) granting plaintiff summary judgment on plaintiff's claims regarding the Tatham Project (denying defendant USFS's motion for summary judgment on that project);

4) ordering that USFS shall not begin its proposed actions on the Tatham Project without the preparation and consideration of legally adequate documentation under NEPA; and

WHEREAS, on June 27, 2013 (Dkt 60), pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the Court entered an Order dismissing plaintiff's remaining claims for violation of the ESA, without prejudice; and

WHEREAS, on July 26, 2013 (Dkt 61), the Court entered judgment pursuant to the June 27 order; and

WHEREAS, L.R. 293(a) requires a prevailing party to file any motion for attorneys' fees pursuant to statute no later than 28 days after entry of final judgment (which deadline would be August 23, 2013); and

WHEREAS, any award of attorney fees regarding the claims that have been adjudicated by the Court would be determined under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. 2412; and

WHEREAS, the deadline for a fee petition pursuant to EAJA is thirty days after final judgment (28 U.S.C. 2412(d)(1)(B)), which the courts have held means thirty days after the deadline to appeal has expired; or, if an appeal is filed, then thirty days after the deadline to petition for certiorari has expired; and

WHEREAS, the deadline to appeal in this case is September 24, 2013, making the earliest EAJA deadline October 24, 2013; and

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to attempt to settle fees; and

WHEREAS, no prior extensions have been requested regarding plaintiff's attorney fee motion;

THEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that the Court extend the deadline to file a fee motion to the EAJA deadline (October 24, 2013, if no appeal is filed; and if an appeal is filed, then thirty days after the deadline to petition for certiorari).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.