United States v. Alpine Land & Reservoir Co.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Tashima, J.
ORDER
The opinion filed on February 14, 2002, and reported at 279 F.3d 1189 , is hereby amended by adding new footnote 22 at the end of the first sentence, second paragraph, of Part IV. CONCLUSION, slip op. at 2625, 279 F.3d at 1189 , as follows:
Except to the extent the mandate is clarified by the above amendment, the petition for panel rehearing of Rambling River Ranches, Inc., is denied. In its response to the petition for panel rehearing, Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians raises issues of abandonment and forfeiture which were not raised in any of the principal briefs. We decline to consider them. The government suggests that the transfer applications involving parcels 1-5 of Rambling River were intrafarm transfers. The district court, however, upheld these transfers “on other grounds,” in its order. See Alpine IV, 27 F.Supp.2d at 1245 n. 13. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
OPINION
In the mid-1980s, a number of landowners in the Newlands Reclamation Project (Project) in Nevada submitted applications to transfer water rights between different parcels of property. The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians (Tribe) protested the applications under the Nevada law of…