Citizens for Better Forestry v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture

Good Law
481 F. Supp. 2d 1059·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27419
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 30, 2007C 05-1144 PJHCalifornia20,524 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hamilton, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment in these two environmental cases came on for hearing before the court on November 1, 2006. The court had previously decided two motions for summary judgment and/or for judgment on the pleadings. Because of the overlap in the facts, administrative records, and claims, the court ordered consolidated summary judgment briefing and argument on the remaining claims.

For the reasons that follow, the court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, and the Vermont Natural Resources Council (collectively “De fenders” plaintiffs) are non-profit environmental and conservation organizations headquartered throughout the United States. Defenders filed their case, 04-4512 PJH, on October 26, 2004, asserting five claims for relief under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 553 ,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.