Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BP America Inc. v. Yerington Paiute Tribe

United States District Court, D. Nevada

October 13, 2017

BP AMERICA INC., and ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, Plaintiffs,
v.
YERINGTON PAIUTE TRIBE; LAURIE A. THOM, in her official capacity as Chairman of the Yerington Paiute Tribe; YERINGTON PAIUTE TRIBAL COURT; and SANDRA-MAE PICKENS in her official capacity as Judge of the Yerington Paiute Tribal Court, Defendants.

          Robert A. Dotson, Jill I. Greiner and DAVIS GRAHAM & STUBBS LLP, Adam S. Cohen, Kenzo S. Kawanabe, Constance L. Rogers, Kyle W. Brenton, Attorneys for Defendants BP America Inc., and Atlantic Richfield Company.

          UNOPPOSED MOTION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT AND TO RESPOND AND REPLY TO INITIAL MOTIONS

          LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6 and Local Rule IA 6-1, Plaintiffs BP America Inc. (“BPA”) and Atlantic Richfield Company (“ARC”) move to extend the time allowed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) and Local Rule 7-2 for the parties to respond to the Complaint and to file, respond to, and reply in support of certain initial motions, as set forth below.

         Prior to filing this Motion, undersigned counsel conferred with counsel for the Defendants Yerington Paiute Tribe (“Tribe”), Laurie A. Thom in her official capacity as Chairman of the Yerington Paiute Tribe (“Chairman Thom”), Yerington Paiute Tribal Court (“Tribal Court”), and Sandra-Mae Pickens in her official capacity as Judge of the Yerington Paiute Tribal Court (“Judge Pickens”). Defendants do not oppose this Motion, but they expressly reserve and do not waive all arguments, including those relating to jurisdiction and sovereign immunity.

         This is the first request to extend the filing deadlines for the submissions addressed herein. In support of this Motion, BPA and ARC state as follows:

         Tribal Court Action

         1. On August 18, 2017, the Tribe filed a related action in the Yerington Paiute Tribal Court, captioned Yerington Paiute Tribe v. BP America Inc. & Atlantic Richfield Co., Case No. CV1017, against BPA and ARC (the “Tribal Court Action”).

         2. On September 22, 2017, BPA and ARC filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or, in the alternative, a Motion to Stay Pending Resolution of the Federal Court Action (“Motion to Dismiss”) in the Tribal Court Action.

         3. To allow for briefing and determination of the relevant and related jurisdictional and other issues by this court, the Tribe filed an unopposed motion in the Tribal Court action extending the time allowed (i) for the Tribe to file a response to the Motion to Dismiss until December 1, 2017, (ii) for BPA and ARC to file a reply until January 15, 2018; and (iii) for a hearing to be held by the Tribal Court on January 30, 2018.

         Federal Court Action

         4. On September 22, 2017, BPA and ARC filed their Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief in this court, naming the Tribe, Chairman Thom, the Tribal Court, and Judge Pickens as defendants. BPA and ARC simultaneously filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction and a Request for Expedited Consideration (“Preliminary Injunction Motion”).

         5. BPA and ARC effected service of the Summons, Complaint, and Preliminary Injunction Motion on all four defendants on October 5, 2017 See Proofs of Service (Dkt. 18-21).

         6. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Defendants have until October 26, 2017, to respond to the Complaint. Counsel for the Tribe and Chairman Thom have indicated that they will file a motion to dismiss.

         7. BPA and ARC reasonably assume that some or all of the Defendants will raise related arguments in both their motion(s) to dismiss and their response(s) to the Preliminary Injunction Motion. Similarly, BPA and ARC will present related counter-arguments in their response and reply briefs. As a result, counsel for the parties have ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.