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.

American Wild Horse Campaign v. Zinke

United States District Court, D. Nevada

April 24, 2018

AMERICAN WILD HORSE CAMPAIGN and KIMBERLEE CURYL, Plaintiffs,
v.
RYAN ZINKE, Secretary of the Department of the Interior, MICHAEL D. NEDD, Acting Deputy Director of Operations of Bureau of Land Management, and JILL SILVEY, District Manager Elko District Office of Bureau of Land Management, Defendants.

          JEFFREY H. WOOD Acting Assistant Attorney General, DEVON LEA FLANAGAN Trial Attorney, D.C. Bar No. 1022195, DANIELA A. ARREGUI Trial Attorney, New York Bar No. 4714713, PAUL GALINDO, Trial Attorney Environment & Natural Resources Division, DAYLE ELIESON United States Attorney District of Nevada HOLLY VANCE Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Federal Defendants.

          KATHERINE A. MEYER District of Columbia Bar No. 244301, WILLIAM N. LAWTON District of Columbia Bar No. 1046604 Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

          JOINT MOTION FOR SCHEDULING ORDER

          HON. ROBERT C. JONES United States District Judge.

         Ryan Zinke, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Interior, Michael D. Nedd, in his official capacity as Acting Deputy Director of Operations of the Bureau of Land Management, Jill Silvey, in her official capacity as the Elko District Office Manager, and the United States Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) (collectively, “Federal Defendants”) and American Wild Horse Campaign and Kimberlee Curyl (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) submit the following proposed schedule for the above-captioned case. The parties have conferred and agree that this is a case for review on the administrative record, and is therefore exempt from the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B)(i), (f)(1).

         Plaintiffs challenge BLM's December 21, 2017, Decision Record, which stated that there were 9, 053 excess wild horses in the Triple B and Antelope Complexes. The proposed action consists of a 10-year gather plan and proposes BLM gather and remove approximately 9, 053 excess wild horses within the Complexes, implement population control measures to gathered and released mares, and may return some gelded horses to the range to be managed as a non-breeding population. On January 30, 2018, BLM initiated a gather of 1, 500 wild horses in the Triple B Complex. The gather ended on February 21, 2018. This was the first gather conducted under the challenged Decision Record. BLM has no additional gathers scheduled and does not currently anticipate that it will be able to conduct any further gathers in the Triple B or Antelope Complexes before the next Fiscal Year (October 1, 2018), unless there is an emergency or public safety issue that arises.

         On February 26, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed their Complaint (ECF No. 1). Plaintiffs served the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada on March 8, 2018, and therefore Federal Defendants' Answer to the Complaint is due on or before May 8, 2018. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(2). On April 5, 2018, Federal Defendants mailed Plaintiffs a copy of the final Administrative Record in the related case, Friends of Animals v. Jill Silvey, No. 3:18-cv-00043-RCJ-VPC. Because the cases challenge the same agency decision, Federal Defendants' position is that the Administrative Record should be the same for both cases. Plaintiffs, however, assert that because their Complaint raises claims that are not raised in the Friends of Animals case, additional records may be required for the Administrative Record for the instant case.

         The parties are currently conferring to informally resolve disputes regarding the Administrative Record. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that the Court grant this motion and enter a scheduling order as follows:

         A. Administrative Record

         i. Federal Defendants shall file their Answer to the Complaint no later than May 8, 2018.

         ii. Plaintiffs have already notified Federal Defendants with their concerns regarding the sufficiency of the Administrative Record. The parties shall confer to resolve any disputes without court intervention until May 1, 2018.

         iii. If the parties agree regarding the sufficiency of the Administrative Record, Federal Defendants shall file the certified Administrative Record with the Court and serve a copy upon Plaintiff no later than May 8, 2018.

         iv. If the parties cannot resolve all disputes regarding the Administrative Record, Plaintiff shall file any Motion to Supplement the Record no later than May 8, 2018.

         v. Parties shall file any Motion to Amend or Supplement the Pleadings no later than June 1, 2018.

         B. ...


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.