Opinion
CASE NO. CV F 11-679 LJO DLB
01-03-2012
SEQUOIA FORESTKEEPER, et al. Plaintiffs, v. THOMAS TIDWELL, in his official capacity as Chief of the United States Forest Service, and the UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, Defendants.
ORDER ON PAGE LIMITS (Doc. 37) AND SUR-REPLY
The parties are briefing cross-summary judgment motions, scheduled to be heard on February 1, 2012. In addition, Defendants have moved to sever and transfer certain claims, also scheduled to be heard on February 1, 2012.
On January 2, 2012, Defendants moved to enlarge the page limits of their reply brief from 10 pages to 25 pages. Defendants cite the following as the bases for the motion:
1. This case involves complex legal issues that cannot be synthesized fully in ten pages;
2. Allowing the Defendants additional pages would promote parties, since this Court granted Plaintiffs' previous motion to enlarge page limits; and
3. Defendants wish to raise a new legal issues in their reply brief, based on the Consolidated
Appropriations Act 2012, signed into law on December 23, 2011. Defendants contend that this law materially affects this Court's jurisdiction. Defendants wish to address their arguments related to this new law in their reply brief.
For good cause appearing, this Court GRANTS Defendants motion to enlarge page limits. Defendant shall file a reply brief that shall not exceed 25 pages.
Because Defendants indicate that they plan to raise a new, jurisdictional argument in their reply brief, this Court finds good cause to GRANT Plaintiffs' the opportunity to file a sur-reply brief. The sur-reply brief, if any, shall focus solely on Defendants' arguments related to whether this Court's jurisdiction is affected by the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012. The sur-reply shall not exceed 10 pages and shall be filed no later than January 18, 2012. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE