Sea Shepherd Legal v. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Case 2:19-cv-01485-JLR Document15 Filed 11/12/19 Page 1 of 3 1 District Judge James L. Robart 7 . g UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE )| SEA SHEPHERD LEGAL, Case No. C19-1485 JLR 12 Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION AND 13 PPRGPOSED] ORDER FOR RELIEF 14 v. FROM 26(F) CONFERENCE, INITIAL DISCLOSURES, AND |] NATIONAL OCEANIC AND JOINT STATUS REPORT ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, et al., Noted for Consideration: 17 November 12, 2019 .

Defendants.

19 Plaintiff SEA SHEPHERD LEGAL (“SSL”) filed the above-captioned lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) against Defendants NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (“NOAA”) and NATIONAL 22 □ MARINE FISHERIES SERVICES (“NMFS”), seeking disclosure of certain documents.

2 .

3 Sea Shepherd Legal v. NOAA, et al., 19-cv-463-JLR is a related case before the Court.

For the reasons stated below, the parties respectfully request that the Court vacate ? = the Rule 26 deadlines (Dkt. No. 13), and instead allow the parties to submit a joint status report within the next 60 days.

The ultimate issue in a FOIA action is whether the agency in question has 2 .

8 “improperly” withheld agency records. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B); Kissinger v. Reporters STIPULATED MOTION . UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Case 2:19-cv-01485-JLR Document15 Filed 11/12/19 Page 2 of 3 || Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 445 U.S. 136, 150 (1980). This is typically a question || of law for the Court, rather than a question of fact, and thus, “‘[sJummary judgment is the || procedural vehicle by which nearly all FOIA cases are resolved.’” Shannahan v. IRS, 411637 F. Supp. 2d 902, 912 (W.D. Wash. 2009) (quoting Los Angeles Times Commce'ns, || LLC v. Dep't of Army, 442 F. Supp. 2d 880, 893 (C.D. Cal. 2006)). The parties agree that || the initial disclosure requirements of Rule 26(a)(1) and the requirements of Rule 26(f), || requiring the parties to prepare a discovery plan, are not appropriate in this case at this || time, as the litigation is unlikely to lead to trial, and very possibly not discovery. That || being said, SSL reserves the right to request discovery should evidence of bad faith or || other grounds for discovery emerge. li ‘Thus far, the parties have worked cooperatively in an attempt to resolve this |} litigation without motion practice. Defendants intend to produce the requested || documents imminently with a final determination letter, As further discussion is || expected after the production, counsel for the parties intend to continue to work together || on any issues. If at any time in the next 60 days it becomes apparent that resolution || between the parties is not feasible, the parties will submit a joint briefing schedule to the || Court.

18 || SO STIPULATED, Dated this 8th day of November 2019.

20 sf Brett W. Sommermeyer 21 BRETT W. SOMMERMEYER, WSBA # 30003 22 . s/____ Catherine E, Pruett 23 CATHERINE E. PRUETT, WA BAR # 35140 24 SEA SHEPHERD LEGAL 25 2226 Eastlake Avenue East, No. 108 26 Seattle, WA 98102 Phone; (206) 504-1600 27 Email: brett(@seashepherdlegal org 3g Email: catherine@seashepherdlegal. org Attorneys for Plaintiff .

STIPULATED MOTION UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Case 2:19-cv-01485-JLR Document15 Filed 11/12/19 Page 3 of 3 2 SO STIPULATED.

3 || Dated this 12th day of November 2019. s/___ Michelle R. Lambert MICHELLE R. LAMBERT, NY # 4666657 6 Assistant United States Attorney United States Attorney’s Office 7 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 8 Tacoma, Washington 98402 Phone: 253-428-3824 9 Email: michelle. [email protected].

Attorneys for Defendants RDER 7 ORDER 18 ITIS SO ORDERED.

19 Mw 0 Dated this day of Novemb 19, JAMES 1] ROBART “ 93 United States District Judge STIPULATED MOTION UNITED STATES ATTORNEY □□□ +t+4f0e¢ □□□ 4 SA Gausncaom Gancoer Grave □□□□