Filed: Jan. 19, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 19, 2016
Summary: JOINT STATUS REPORT AND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . The parties note for the Court, in light of the fact that this matter was recently re-assigned (Dkt. No. 72), that pending are a fully briefed motion to supplement (Dkt. Nos. 60, 63, and 64) and motion to dismiss (Dkt. Nos. 61, 62, and 65). Further, because counsel for the United States will be in trial January 25 through February 3, 2016, and in consideration of
Summary: JOINT STATUS REPORT AND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . The parties note for the Court, in light of the fact that this matter was recently re-assigned (Dkt. No. 72), that pending are a fully briefed motion to supplement (Dkt. Nos. 60, 63, and 64) and motion to dismiss (Dkt. Nos. 61, 62, and 65). Further, because counsel for the United States will be in trial January 25 through February 3, 2016, and in consideration of ..
More
JOINT STATUS REPORT AND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
The parties note for the Court, in light of the fact that this matter was recently re-assigned (Dkt. No. 72), that pending are a fully briefed motion to supplement (Dkt. Nos. 60, 63, and 64) and motion to dismiss (Dkt. Nos. 61, 62, and 65). Further, because counsel for the United States will be in trial January 25 through February 3, 2016, and in consideration of the fact that the Court recently reset hearing on the cross motions for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 73), the parties hereby stipulate to, and seek an order from this Court, continuing the briefing schedule on the pending motions for summary judgment as set forth below.
Event Current Date Proposed Date
Defendants' Opposition and January 21, 2016 February 8, 2016
Cross-Motion
Plaintiff's Reply and Opposition February 11, 2016 March 7, 2016
Defendants' Reply February 29, 2016 March 17, 2016
The parties do not propose any change in the current hearing date of March 24, 2016, at 2 p.m.
The parties further note that the Forest Service halted the Project some time ago (though there is a dispute regarding the ongoing environmental impacts of previously implemented Project actions) and authorization for the challenged Project has been withdrawn. There is thus good cause for the continuance, and the Court should grant it.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
