Opinion
For Conservation Congress, a non-profit organization, Plaintiff: Rachel Marie Fazio, LEAD ATTORNEY, John Muir Project, Big Bear City, CA; Sean T. Malone, PHV, PRO HAC VICE, Sean T. Malone, Attorney at Law, Eugene, OR.
For United States Forest Service, Defendant: Barclay Thomas Samford, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Dept. of Justice, Environment of Natural Resources Division, Denver, CO; Sean Christian Duffy, Us Dep't Of Justice, Environment And Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
For County of Siskiyou, County of Siskiyou, Amicus: Brian L Morris, Office Of The Siskiyou County Counsel, Office of County Counsel, Yreka, CA.
ORDER GRANTING COUNTY OF SISKIYOU'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The hearing on February 2, 2015 is vacated since this matter is suitable for decision without oral argument pursuant to E.D. Cal. R. 230(g).
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR., Senior United States District Judge.
The County of Siskiyou seeks leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of Defendant's motion for summary judgment. The motion is unopposed.
Plaintiff's Complaint " challeng[es] Defendant United States Forest Service's decision to authorize the Porcupine Vegetation and Road Management Project" (" the Project") and seeks to " enjoin Defendant Forest Service from continuing the operation of any timber sale." (Compl. ¶ ¶ 1, 84, ECF No. 1.) The County argues its proposed amicus brief would benefit the court because it represents " the perspective of those who will be most directly impacted by the Court's decision" since the Project is located in Siskiyou County (Notice of Mot. & Mot. File Amicus Curiae Brief (" Mot.") 4:5-6, ECF No. 21.)
" District courts frequently welcome amicus briefs from nonparties concerning legal issues that have potential ramifications beyond the parties directly involved or if the amicus has 'unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties are able to provide.'" NGV Gaming, Ltd. v. Upstream Point Molate, LLC, 355 F.Supp.2d 1061, 1067 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (quotation omitted).
In light of the broad discretion the Court has when deciding whether to permit a putative amicus curiae to file a brief, and the argument the County makes in its motion, the County's motion for leave to file an amicus brief in support of the Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.