State of Oklahoma v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al
| State of Oklahoma |
| United States Environmental Protection Agency, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Gina McCarthy and Jo-Ellen Darcy |
| 4:2015cv00381 |
| July 8, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma |
| Tulsa Office |
| Tulsa |
| Claire V Eagan |
| Frank H McCarthy |
| Environmental Matters |
| 33 U.S.C. ยง 1319 Clean Water Act |
| None |
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
110
OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan that Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Case No. 15-CV-381-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 17) and Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Case No. 15-CV-386-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 27) are deni ed. The Motion to Intervene as Defendants (Case No. 15-CV-381-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 64) and the Motion to Intervene as Defendants (Case No. 15-CV-386-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 74) are granted, and Waterkeeper Alliance and L.E.A.D. Agency are permitted to intervene in these consolidated cases under Rule 24(a). The intervenors' complaint in intervention is due no later than June 13, 2019. Defendants' Motion and Memorandum in Support Thereof to Stay Proceedings Pending a Ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Subject-Matter Jurisdiction (Case No. 15-CV-381-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 25), Defendants' Motion and Memorandum in Support Thereof to Stay Proceedings Pending a Ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Subject-Matter Jurisdiction (Case No. 15-CV-386-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 39), Waterkeeper Alliance Et Al's Motion and Memorandum in Support of Leave to File Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff's Request for Preliminary Injunction (Case No. 15-CV-381-CVE-FHM, Dkt. ## 74, 75), Waterkeeper Alliance Et Al's Motion and Memorandum in Support of Leave to File Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff's Request for Preliminary Injunction (Case No. 15-CV-386-CVE-FHM, Dkt. ## 87, 88), and the Renewed Motion and Memorandum to Allow Filing of Brief or Proposed Brief in Opposition to Motions for Injunctive Relief and Memorandum (Case No. 15-CV-381-CVE-FHM, Dkt. # 98) are moot. The parties shall submit a joint status report no later than June 13, 2019. ; setting/resetting deadline(s)/hearing(s): ( Miscellaneous Deadline set for 6/13/2019, Status Report due by 6/13/2019); finding as moot 25 Motion to Stay; granting 64 Motion to Intervene; finding as moot 74 Motion for Leave to File Document(s); finding as moot 75 Motion for Leave to File Document(s); finding as moot 98 Motion for Leave to File Document(s); denying 17 Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Re: 8 Amended Complaint ) (RGG, Chambers) Modified on 5/30/2019 to change text of entry regarding ruling of 74 (sac-qc, Dpty Clk).
|
|
Filing
36
OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan that Case No. 15-CV-381-CVE-FHM and Case No. 15-CV-386-CVE-PJC are dismissed without prejudice due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction., dismissing/terminating case (terminates case) (Re: 2 Complaint, 8 AMENDED COMPLAINT 35 Notice (Other) ) (Documents Terminated: 25 MOTION to Stay , 11 MOTION to Consolidate Cases , 17 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction ) (RGG, Chambers) Modified on 2/24/2016 to create link to 8 (sac, Dpty Clk).
|
|
Filing
22
OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan ; staying case; striking/terminating deadline(s)/Hearing(s); setting/resetting deadline(s)/hearing(s): ( Status Report due by 10/1/2015); granting 14 Motion to Stay (Re: 8 Amended Complaint ) (RGG, Chambers)
|
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 Oklahoma Northern 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.
