Rocky Mountain Wild, Inc v. U.S. Forest Service et al

Plaintiff: Rocky Mountain Wild , Inc
Defendant: United States Forest Service and United States Department of Agriculture
Case Number: 1:2014cv02496
Filed: September 9, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Colorado
Office: Denver Office
County: Denver
Presiding Judge: Wiley Y. Daniel
Presiding Judge: Kathleen M. Tafoya
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act
Cause of Action: 05:552
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 6, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER On or before May 31, 2016, counsel for Rocky Mountain Wild and counsel for the Forest Service shall meet and confer in good faith as to whether the Forest Service has, at that point, fully discharged its FOIA obligations as they pertain to R ocky Mountain Wilds February 2014 FOIA request; and On or before June 15, 2016, Rocky Mountain Wild shall file a joint status report setting forth the issues on which the parties agree, and the parties respective positions on issues for which they do not agree, if any. Based on the joint status report, the Court will address any remaining issues and set any additional deadlines, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 4/6/2016. (evana, )
November 25, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER Denying 36 Defendants Motion to Clarify Regarding Search and Production of Records for Certain Forest Service Custodians. The five named custodians are not relieved from inclusion in the search for responsive records, as defined in the September 30, 2015 Order, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 11/25/2015.(evana, )
September 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER That Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 15 is DENIED. It is FURTHER ORDERED as follows: Plaintiffs Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment ECF No. 19 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; Defendants Motion to Strike Evidence in Plaintiffs Response to Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 20 is DENIED, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 9/30/2015.(evana, )
September 11, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER Setting Scheduling Conference for 12/10/2014 09:45 AM in Courtroom C201 before Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 9/11/14. (sgrim)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rocky Mountain Wild, Inc v. U.S. Forest Service et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rocky Mountain Wild , Inc
Represented By: Matthew David Sandler
Represented By: Travis Earl Stills
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States Forest Service
Represented By: Zeyen Julian Wu(Designation Federal Agency Attorney)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States Department of Agriculture
Represented By: Zeyen Julian Wu(Designation Federal Agency Attorney)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ 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.


Why Is My Information Online?