Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

THE SIERRA CLUB v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, C-11-0846-MEJ. (2012)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20121231329 Visitors: 13
Filed: Nov. 21, 2012
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2012
Summary: SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT MARIA-ELENA JAMES, Chief Magistrate Judge. This is an action brought by Plaintiffs pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, to compel production of documents. The information request upon which this suit is based, sought information submitted to defendant relating to the operations of coal-fired power plants owned by the Luminant corporation. After the parties completed briefing cross-motions for summary judgment, but before oral ar
More

SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT

MARIA-ELENA JAMES, Chief Magistrate Judge.

This is an action brought by Plaintiffs pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, to compel production of documents. The information request upon which this suit is based, sought information submitted to defendant relating to the operations of coal-fired power plants owned by the Luminant corporation.

After the parties completed briefing cross-motions for summary judgment, but before oral argument on same, on May 20, 2012, the Court vacated the scheduled hearing and ordered the parties to meet and confer in her chambers on May 30, 2012. Dkt. No. 50. After fruitful discussion in chambers, the parties agreed to continue with informal settlement discussions in an effort to resolve this matter without further litigation. Accordingly, the parties engaged in a number of direct and informal settlement conference calls and have exchanged a settlement proposal. Additionally, the Parties wish to inform the Court that recent EPA enforcement activities involving Luminant Generation Company may impact EIP and Sierra Club's interest in the documents at issue in this matter. Because the parties required additional time in which to explore possible resolution of this case, when they reported back to the Court on September 20, 2012, they requested that the case be stayed until November 21, 2012 by which time they would inform the Court of the status of their settlement efforts. Dkt. No. 52. The Court so ordered. Dkt. No. 53.

At this time, the parties have not yet been able to obtain consensus on how to settle the case. They therefore desire additional time in which to explore a negotiated resolution to this dispute.

Accordingly, the parties request that they be provided an additional month in which to attempt to conclude their settlement negotiations and report back to the Court on the status of same no later than December 21, 2012.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer