Wilcox
Northern California River Watch v. Wilcox
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Paez, J.
ORDER
The unopposed motion of the United States, as amicus curiae, to clarify the court’s Opinion is granted as follows:
The Opinion, filed on August 25, 2010, and reported at 620 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir.2010), is amended as follows:
At Slip Op. 12801, [ 620 F.3d at 1089-90 ], the first full paragraph beginning with
An Amended Opinion is filed concurrently with this Order.
OPINION
Robert Evans and Northern California River Watch (“River Watch”) appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Schellinger defendants and three employees of the California Department of Fish and Game (collectively “Defendants”). 1 River Watch contends that Defendants violated the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. Specifically, River Watch argues that Defendants dug up and removed the endangered plant species, Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthes vincu lans) and, therefore, violated § 9 of the ESA, which makes it unlawful for anyone to “take” a listed plant on areas under federal jurisdiction. 2 See 16 U.S.C. § 1538 (a)(2)(B).