Klamath Irrigation District v. USDC-ORM
| KLAMATH IRRIGATION DISTRICT |
| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON, MEDFORD |
| In re: KLAMATH IRRIGATION DISTRICT, U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION and OREGON DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES |
| 22-70143 |
| July 12, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
 IN RE: KLAMATH IRRIGATION DISTRICT V. USDC-ORM
|
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 13, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Added Attorney(s) John Luther Smeltzer for party(s) Real Party in Interest U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, in case 22-70143. [12493188] (JFF) [Entered: 07/13/2022 03:26 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of John Luther Smeltzer (U.S. Department of Justice, ENRD Appellate Section, PO Box 7415, Washington DC 20044) for Real Party in Interest U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Date of service: 07/13/2022. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [12492843] [22-70143] (Smeltzer, John) [Entered: 07/13/2022 12:04 PM] |
| Filing 2 FILED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS. DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. NOTIFIED REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST OF FILING. [12492761] (HH) [Entered: 07/13/2022 11:24 AM] |
| Filing 1 (Order Filed 7/12/2022 in No. 22-70052) Filed order (BARRY G. SILVERMAN, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN and DANIEL P. COLLINS): Petitioner filed this petition for a writ of mandamus on March 24, 2022, requesting an order directing the district court to rule on petitioners pending motion for remand. On April 19, 2022, this court denied the petition without prejudice to the filing of a new mandamus petition in the event the district court had not ruled on the motion for remand within 21 days. The record reflects that the district court denied the motion to remand on April 25, 2022. Petitioner has now filed a supplemental petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the district courts April 25, 2022 order. The supplemental petition (Docket Entry No. 6) is construed as a new standalone petition for a writ of mandamus. So construed, the petition raises issues that warrant an answer. See Fed. R. App. P. 21(b). Accordingly, within 14 days after the date of this order, the real party in interest shall file an answer. The district court, within 14 days after the date of this order, may address the petition if it so desires. The district court may elect to file an answer with this court or to issue a supplemental order and serve a copy on this court. etitioner may file a reply within 5 days of service of the answer(s).The petition for a writ of mandamus, the answer(s), and any reply are referred to the next available merits panel. The Clerk will close No. 22-70052, open a new case, and transfer the petition filed at Docket Entry No. 6, and this order, to the new case. The subsequent filings noted in this order, and any other filings related to the petition, will be made in the new case. The Clerk shall serve this order on the district court and District Judge AnnL. Aiken. [12492758] (HH) [Entered: 07/13/2022 11:22 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
