Center for Biological Diversity et al v. Salazar et al
| 3:2009cv08207 |
| November 16, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Environmental Matters Office |
| David G Campbell |
| None |
| U.S. Government Defendant |
| 30:1276 Interior: Review of Agency Action |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
200
ORDER denying 188 Motion for injunction pending appeal. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/11/2012.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
184
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: 1. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs with respect to Claim Four of the Third Amended Complaint. 2. The Clerk is directed to terminate this action. (See document for further details). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/7/11. (LAD)
|
|
Filing
171
ORDER granting 168 Motion to Vacate. A telephonic conference is set for 7/20/2011 at 11:00 a.m. Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 7/15/2011.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
166
ORDER denying 164 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 6/27/2011.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
163
ORDER granting in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs on claims one, two, three, and five of the third amended complaint 130 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs on claims one, two, three, and f ive of the third amended complaint 136 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs on claims one, two, three, and five of the third amended complaint 141 Motion for Summary Judgment. Claim four is remanded to BLM consistent with this order. BLM shall have until 6/24/2011 to revise its decision. Parties shall file simultaneous memoranda NOT TO EXCEED 10 PAGES in length by 7/22/2011; parties shall file simultaneous response memoranda NOT TO EXCEED 5 PAGES in length by 7/29/2011. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 5/27/2011.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
102
ORDER denying 80 Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal; granting 81 Motion to File Records Under Seal. The Clerk is directed to file under seal the lodged declarations (Docs. 83, 84, 85). (See document for full details). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 8/11/10.(LAD)
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER denying 36 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Second case management conference set for 7/9/2010 at 2:00 PM before the Honorable David G. Campbell, Courtroom 603, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85003. The parties shall file a joint case management report on or before 7/2/2010. The report should address the topics identified in paragraph 3 of the Court's order dated 4/12/2010 44 . Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 6/17/2010.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER granting Plaintiff's 49 Motion for leave to file a second amended complaint; directing the Clerk to file the lodged proposed second amended complaint. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 6/8/10.(REW)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER Denison Arizona Strip, LLC and Denison Mines (USA) Corp.'s motion 19 to intervene as defendants is granted. The Clerk is directed to file the lodged proposed answer (Dkt. #28). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 3/24/10.(KMG)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Center for Biological Diversity et al v. Salazar et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
