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.

States v. United States

United States District Court, D. Nevada

October 25, 2019

STATE OF NEVADA, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES, ET AL., Defendants, and STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Intervenor-Defendant.

          Aaron D. Ford Attorney General Daniel P. Nubel (Bar No. 13553) Deputy Attorney General Office of the Nevada Attorney General James J. Pisanelli., Bar No. 4027 Todd L. Bice, Bar No. 4534 Jordan T. Smith, Bar No. 12097 Emily Buchwald, Bar No. 13442 Pisanelli Bice pllc Special Deputy Attorneys General Martin G. Malsch, Esq. EGAN, FITZPATRICK, MALSCH & LAWRENCE, PLLC Special Deputy Attorneys General Attorneys for the State of Nevada

          Jean E. Williams David L. Negri U.S. Department of Justice Environment & Natural Resources Div. c/o U.S. Attorney's Office Attorneys for the United States

          SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING REINSTATED MOTIONS

          MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff State of Nevada and the United States Defendants, by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

         1. On April 30, 2019, the Court denied certain motions as moot after staying the case following Nevada's interlocutory appeal from the denial of its motion for preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 112.) The Court stated: “All remaining pending motions (ECF Nos. 88, 92, 93, 108) are denied as moot and without prejudice to the moving parties to request that the motion, if fully briefed, be reinstated, or to filing a renewed motion within 14 days from the Ninth Circuit's decision on Nevada's interlocutory appeal.”

         2. On August 15, 2019, after the Ninth Circuit dismissed Nevada's appeal as moot, Nevada filed a Motion to Lift District Court Stay and Motion to Establish Briefing Schedule. (ECF No. 116.) Nevada requested that the Court lift the previously imposed stay, set a briefing schedule on Nevada's request to amend its complaint, and stay the 14-day deadline to renew or reinstate the motions previously denied as moot.

         3. On August 20, 2019, the Court entered an order lifting the stay and established a briefing schedule on the motion for leave to amend, but still allowed all parties, if they chose, to have certain motions renewed or reinstated sooner. (ECF No. 118.) The Court explained that it was “permitting the parties to choose the route that is most efficacious for them in either reinstating or renewing the motions the court relevantly denied as moot per the April order.” The Court “ordered that the parties who filed motions that were denied without prejudice when the Court imposed the stay may (1) elect to seek reinstatement of the prior motions within 14 days from the date of this order or (2) file renewed motions within 14 days from the Court's ruling on Nevada's motion for leave to amend its Complaint.”

         4. On August 21, 2019, the United States Defendants filed a Notice of Reinstatement of Motions for Protective Order (ECF No. 92) and Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 93). (ECF No. 120.) The United States “request[ed], however, that any hearing or ruling on these Motions be delayed until either 1) the Court's August 30 deadline for filing a motion for leave to amend the compliant expires without filing of any motion or 2) the Court has a chance to rule on any motion to amend the complaint.” The Court granted the request to reinstate on August 23, 2019. (ECF No. 122).

         5. Nevada reinstated its Countermotion to Conduct Discovery on September 3, 2019. (ECF No. 129.) The Honorable Carla Baldwin Carry, U.S. Magistrate Judge, granted Nevada's request to reinstate its countermotion for leave to conduct discovery on October 3, 2019. (ECF No. 133.)

         6. In the meantime, the parties stipulated that judicial economy will be served if the Court extended Nevada's deadline to file any response to the United States' reinstated Motion for Protective Order (ECF Nos. 92, 120) and reinstated Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 93, 120) until 14 days after the Court rules on Nevada's forthcoming motion to amend the complaint. (ECF No. 127.)

         7. The parties also stipulated to extend the United States' deadline to file any response to Nevada's Countermotion for Leave to Conduct Discovery until 14 days after the Court rules on Nevada's forthcoming motion to amend the complaint. (Id.).

         8. The Court entered an order on the parties' stipulation on September 3, 2019. (ECF No. 130.)

         9. On October 21, 2019, the Court granted Nevada's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint, in part, allowing Nevada to request removal of the plutonium and assert a cause of action for common law nuisance. (ECF No. 126.)

         10. Following the Court's ruling on Nevada's Motion for Leave to Amend, Nevada and the United States have met and conferred. The parties agree that judicial economy will be served by withdrawing all pending reinstated motions and countermotions, including the United States' Motions for Protective Order, Motion to Dismiss, (ECF Nos. 92, 93, 120), and Nevada's Countermotion to Conduct ...


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.