WildEarth Guardians v. United States Forest Service et al
| WildEarth Guardians |
| United States Forest Service, Rick Cables, Charles S. Richmond, United States Departmentof the Interior and C. Stephen Allred |
| 1:2008cv02167 |
| October 7, 2008 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Environmental Matters Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| John L. Kane |
| None |
| U.S. Government Defendant |
| 05:702 Administrative Procedure Act |
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
102
OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING AGENCY ACTION Decision of the agency Defendants are affirmed. Clerk to enter judgment in favor of Defendants and close this case, by Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 10/31/11. (gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
86
ORDER granting 85 Joint Motion to Amend the Fourth Revised Joint Case Management Plan. Adm Defendants and Intervenors Briefs due by 11/1/2010. Adm Plaintiff Reply Brief due by 12/22/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 8/26/10.(gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
78
Fourth Revised Joint Case Management Plan (ORDER) Adm Plaintiffs Brief due by 7/12/2010. Adm Defendants Brief due by 8/30/2010. Adm Plaintiff Reply Brief due by 9/21/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 04/15/2010.(sah, )
|
|
Filing
75
Memorandum Opinion and ORDER re 70 Motion to Compel. The Court finds that the Administrative Records are properly remanded to the Respondents for completion. Respondents shall submit an updated privilege log identifying for each document withheld on the basis of the attorney-client privilege as directed in the order, by Judge John L. Kane on 4/1/10.(jak, )
|
|
Filing
69
Third Revised Joint Case Management Plan (ORDER), by Judge John L. Kane on 12/4/09. (gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
58
Second Revised Joint Case Management Plan (ORDER) Adm Plaintiffs Brief due by 1/15/2010. Adm Defendants Brief due by 2/15/2010. Adm Plaintiff Reply Brief due by 3/5/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 10/2/09. (gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
51
MINUTE ORDER granting 50 Motion to Withdraw Appearance of Scott P. Sinor. By Judge John L. Kane on 09/16/2009.(sah, )
|
|
Filing
44
Revised Joint Case Management Plan (ORDER) Adm Plaintiffs Brief due by 1/15/2010. Adm Defendants Brief due by 2/15/2010. Adm Plaintiff Reply Brief due by 3/5/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 8/28/09. (gms, ) Modified on 8/31/2009 to correct adm defendants brief ddl (gms, ).
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER 5 MOTION to Intervene filed by Mountain Coal Company L.L.C. is granted. Answer and Affirmative Defense is accepted as filed. Stay is lifted. By 8/26/09 parties to confer and submit Joint Case Management Plan, by Judge John L. Kane on 8/12/09. (gms, )
|
|
Filing
34
Joint Case Management Plan (ORDER) Adm Plaintiffs Brief due by 9/21/2009. Adm Defendants Brief due by 10/21/2009. Adm Plaintiff Reply Brief due by 11/9/2009, by Judge John L. Kane on 5/29/09. (gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
31
Minute ORDER denying 22 Mountain Coal Company's Motion to Stay Pending Appeal, by Judge John L. Kane on 5/5/09.(gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
18
Minute ORDER granting 17 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to File First Amended Complaint. First amended complaint is accepted as filed, by Judge John L. Kane on 2/20/09.(gms, )
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER denying 15 Mountain Coal Company's Motion for Limited Reconsideration and Clarification, by Judge John L. Kane on 2/9/09.(gmssl, )
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER denying 5 Motion to Intervene by Mountain Coal Company. Signed by Judge John L. Kane on 1/22/09.(gms, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado 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
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.
