Here is the complaint in Elem Indian Colony of Pomo Indians of the Sulphur Bank Rancheria v. Ceiba Legal LLP (N.D. Cal.):
A complaint involving many of the same individuals captioned John v. Brown is here.
Northern District of California
Venue Change for Jurisdiction Suit Against Blue Lake Rancheria Tribal Court
Here are the materials in Acres v. Blue Lake Rancheria Tribal Court, 16-cv-02622 (N.D. Cali.):
Doc. 9 Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss
Doc. 11 Plaintiff’s Memo and Points of Authorities Opposing Defendants’ MTD
Complaint previously posted here.
Elem Indian Colony of Pomo Indians Members File ICRA Habeas Claim to Challenge Disenrollment
Here is the complaint and exhibits in John v. Brown (N.D. Cal.):
Karuk Tribe Complaint against National Marine Fisheries Service
Here is the complaint in Karuk Tribe v. Stelle (N.D. Cal.):
An excerpt:
This is a civil action against the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) of the U.S. Department of Commerce, and the United States Forest Service (“USFS”) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Plaintiffs allege NMFS violated the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) when it issued a Biological Opinion (“BiOp”) and Incidental Take Statement (“ITS”) for the Westside Fire Recovery Project on Forest Service lands in the Klamath River watershed. Plaintiffs further allege the USFS violated the National Environmental Policy Act and National Forest Management Act when it issued a Record of Decision (“ROD”) approving the Westside Fire Recovery Project on the Klamath National Forest.
Tribal Challenge to Willits Bypass Project
Here is the complaint in Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians of California v. United States Dept. of Transportation (N.D. Cal.):
An excerpt:
Defendants in this case must not be allowed to destroy historic properties, cultural resources, and sacred sites to build the Willits Bypass Project. This case challenges Defendants’ ongoing failure to properly identify and protect Plaintiffs’ ancestral, sacred, cultural, and archaeological sites and resources in the construction of the Willits Bypass Project. As a result of Defendants’ ground-disturbing activity both along the route and in the mitigation lands of the Willits Bypass Project, Defendants have destroyed the ancestral Native American sacred and cultural sites of Plaintiffs the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians and the Round Valley Indian Tribes of California and failed to protect such places in the area of the Project, including the mitigation lands.
Federal Court Orders Guidiville Rancheria and Casino Development Partner to Pay $1.9M in Attorney Fees to City of Richmond
Here are the materials in Guidiville Rancheria v. United States (N.D. Cal.):
113 City of Richmond Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
212 DCT Order Granting Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
255 City of Richmond Motion for Atty Fees
289 DCT Order Granting Motion for Atty Fees
The tribe has appealed to the Ninth Circuit on the merits of the claim and has already filed their opening brief:
30 Year Maximum “Take” FWS Rule Struck Down
Judge Koh (N.D. Calif.) set aside and remanded the Fish & Wildlife Service’s Final 30-Year Rule that extended the maximum duration of permits to take bald and golden eagles from five years to thirty years. The order states that the FWS failed to demonstrate that neither an EIS nor EA was needed for this twenty-five year extension.
The motion for summary judgment was granted for all NEPA claims, denied in part due to unsubstantiated (two sentences) ESA claims.
Order here.
Original complaint and previous coverage here.
On Reconsideration, Federal Court Dismisses Indian Group’s Petition to Preserve Judge Cebull Emails
Here are the new materials in Four Directions v. Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States (N.D. Cal.):
83 DCT Order Granting Motion for Reconsideration
Prior materials here.
Ninth Circuit Sitting En Banc Rules in Favor of Big Lagoon Rancheria in Gaming Dispute with California
Here is the opinion in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California:
From the court’s syllabus:
The en banc court affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of a tribe that alleged that the State of California had failed to negotiate in good faith for a gaming compact under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act for Class III gaming on a parcel of land taken into trust for the tribe by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Rejecting California’s argument that the tribe lacked standing to compel it to negotiate in good faith under the IGRA, the en banc court held that the State’s argument amounted to an improper collateral attack on the BIA’s decisions to take the parcel of land into trust and to designate the tribe as a federally recognized Indian tribe. The en banc court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a continuance for additional discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f).
The en banc court dismissed the tribe’s cross-appeal as moot.
Links to oral argument and briefs here.
Indian Groups Persuade Federal Court to Preserve Judge Cebull Emails
Here are the materials in Four Directions v. Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States (N.D. Cal.):
34 Petition to Preserve Evidence
You must be logged in to post a comment.