Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Center for Biological Diversity v. Mattis, 3:03-cv-4350 (EMC). (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180214c33 Visitors: 29
Filed: Feb. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 13, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION MODIFYING DEADLINE FOR COMPILATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AND STAYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE (National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . On January 26, 2018, the Parties filed a Stipulation Modifying the Deadline for Compilation of the Administrative Record (Dkt. 211) updating the Court on progress towards agreement on the administrative record and stipulating that the time for Plaintiffs to file objections to the record be exte
More

STIPULATION MODIFYING DEADLINE FOR COMPILATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AND STAYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

(National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 470 et seq.)

On January 26, 2018, the Parties filed a Stipulation Modifying the Deadline for Compilation of the Administrative Record (Dkt. 211) updating the Court on progress towards agreement on the administrative record and stipulating that the time for Plaintiffs to file objections to the record be extended until February 9, 2018 to allow the parties to continue to meet and confer in an effort to resolve outstanding questions. The Parties agreed that if Plaintiffs' questions cannot be resolved without the Court's intervention, the Parties will submit for the Court's consideration a separate briefing schedule for any administrative record motions, and that the briefing schedule adopted on November 9, 2017 (Dkt. 207) may be amended to stay briefing on summary judgment until any administrative record motions are resolved. On February 1, 2018, the Court entered an order adopting the Parties' stipulation (Dkt. 212).

On January 25, 2018, Counsel for Plaintiffs submitted to Counsel for the Government questions regarding five groups of documents. On February 7, 2018 the Government provided Plaintiffs' Counsel with answers to these questions. The Plaintiffs are currently reviewing these answers. With regards to one group of documents, the Parties are considering a protective order that would allow disclosure but have not yet reached agreement on the terms.

The Parties now stipulate that the time for filing objections to the record be further postponed until March 2, 2018, to allow the Parties to continue to seek agreement, and that the briefing schedule for substantive motions be amended to stay briefing on summary judgment until any administrative record motions are resolved. The Parties request that the May 24, 2018 hearing date be cancelled pending agreement on an amended briefing schedule.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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