From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pac. Dawn LLC v. Locke

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 3, 2011
NO. C10-4829 TEH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)

Opinion

NO. C10-4829 TEH

11-03-2011

PACIFIC DAWN LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GARY LOCKE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING AND CONTINUING

MOTION HEARING

This matter is currently before the Court on the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. Upon review of the submitted papers, the Court remains unclear on how the fishing history of "B" permits was used in determining the allocations at issue in this case. Defendants state that, "The Council and NMFS . . . consider[ed] the catch history of vessels registered to expired permits as part of the fleet's history (i.e., 'in the denominator') as a method to determine relative participation in each year," Defs.' Mot. for Summ. J. at 18, but the cited "example of calculation of relative history" at C15:*7-*8 does not appear to indicate how any history from "B" permits would be considered. Id. The parties shall file a joint supplemental brief on this issue, including a numerical example and setting forth any differences of opinion if necessary, on or before November 16, 2011.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing on these motions shall be continued to December 5, 2011, at 10:00 AM.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Summaries of

Pac. Dawn LLC v. Locke

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 3, 2011
NO. C10-4829 TEH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)
Case details for

Pac. Dawn LLC v. Locke

Case Details

Full title:PACIFIC DAWN LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GARY LOCKE, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 3, 2011

Citations

NO. C10-4829 TEH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)