Vilsack

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 NATIONAL FAMILY FARM Case No. 21-cv-05695-JD COALITION, et al., 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER RE MOOTNESS 9 v. 10 TOM VILSACK, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 13 On December 2, 2024, the Court entered partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs 14 on their Plant Protection Act (PPA)-based claims under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 15 prospectively vacated the challenged rule, and remanded to the agency for further consideration. 16 See generally Dkt. No. 81. The Court directed the parties to confer about plaintiffs’ remaining 17 challenges under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) and the National Environmental 18 Policy Act (NEPA). Id. at 26. The conference was unsuccessful in the sense that the parties could 19 not agree whether those claims were ripe for decision or moot. See Dkt. No. 82. APHIS and the 20 trade association defendant-intervenors say that the vacatur of the challenged rule mooted the 21 remaining claims.1 Id. at 3-5. Plaintiffs disagree. Id. at 5-7. 22 The record demonstrates that…