STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), Plaintiffs Western Watersheds Project, et al. and Federal Defendant United States Forest Service hereby voluntarily dismiss the remaining claims in this action from Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint (ECF No. 103). Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint challenged ten categorical exclusion ("CE") decisions covering authoriza-tion of livestock grazing. Those CE decisions were the following:

See ECF No. 117, at 1.

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment as to two CE decisions: the Big Ridge CE on the Klamath National Forest and the Pine Mountain, York Cabin, Middle Creek and Elk Mountain CE on the Mendocino National Forest (ECF No. 136; ECF No. 147).

On March 30, 2012, the Court issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 159). The Court held the conclusions reached by the Forest Service in connection with the Big Ridge CE and Mendocino CE decision memos were arbitrary and capricious in certain respects and failed to take the "hard look" required by NEPA.

The Forest Service has subsequently acknowledged that, pursuant to the Court's Summary Judgment Order, the Big Ridge and Mendocino CE Decision Memos are set aside, and has notified Plaintiffs that, as of October 23, 2012, the Big Ridge allotment on the Klamath National Forest and the Pine Mountain, York Cabin, Middle Creek and Elk Mountain allotments on the Mendocino National Forest are currently scheduled for environmental analysis under NEPA during the 2014-2016 review period.

Of the remaining CEs challenged in Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint, the Forest Service has also notified Plaintiffs that it has withdrawn the Little North Fork, Shelly Meadows, and Big Meadows CE decisions on the Klamath National Forest and the Champs Flat, Gooch Valley, Lower Pine Creek, and North Eagle Lake CE decision on the Lassen National Forest. As of October 23, 2012, these allotments are currently scheduled for environmental analysis under NEPA during the 2014-2016 review period.

Plaintiffs hereby dismiss with prejudice their claims against the one outstanding CE decision from their Third Amended Complaint: the Deer Creek and Lyonsville CE from the Lassen National Forest.

Pursuant to these actions by Defendant Forest Service and Plaintiffs, all of the remaining claims in Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint are resolved. Therefore, Plaintiffs and Defendant Forest Service stipulate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) that this case may be dismissed with prejudice, in accordance with the accompanying judgment.

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court hereby approves the Parties' Stipulation of Dismissal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.