ORDER

JOHN L. KANE, District Judge.

This matter is currently before me on the government's Motion to Stay Proceedings (doc. 52). The government seeks a sixty-day stay of these proceedings to consider the implications of Judge Krieger's ruling in Colorado Environmental Coalition, et al. v. Salazar, et al., No. 08-cv-01460-MSK-KLM (D. Colo. June 22, 2012). Although Plaintiffs have no objection to a seven to ten-day stay, they argue the government's requested stay would unduly delay these proceedings and prejudice their interest in halting approvals of drilling permits to implement the oil and gas projects challenged in this case.

In order to justify their requested stay, the government must establish that: (1) a stay will not prejudice Plaintiffs or other parties; (2) the Federal Defendants will suffer hardship or inequity if the action is not stayed; and (3) judicial resources will be conserved if the stay is granted. See Landis v. N. Amer. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 255 (1936). Although the latter two factors favor entry of a stay, Plaintiffs will suffer some prejudice from the requested stay. Accordingly, I find a sixty-day stay inappropriate.

Because the government has already had thirty days to review Judge Krieger's ruling, the merits briefing schedule will be stayed for thirty (30) days. This stay will allow the government ample time to review Judge Krieger's ruling, while simultaneously ensuring the speedy determination of Plaintiffs' challenge.