From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

L. A. Waterkeeper v. SSA Terminals

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 1, 2023
CV 22-1198 FWS (MRWx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2023)

Opinion

CV 22-1198 FWS (MRWx)

02-01-2023

Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. SSA Terminals


Present Hon. Michael R. Wilner, U.S. Magistrate Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

1. The Court received a discovery motion from the parties in this environmental law action. (Docket # 48.) The motion is supported by over 500 pages of exhibits.

2. Notably, the declaration of Mr. Olsson (an attorney for the defense) has 483 pages of materials attached to it. (Docket # 48-3.) As best I could tell before my computer crashed, most of the pages consist of some lengthy permit related to the facility, plus items available on the docket of our Court. The materials are not highlighted or annotated in any meaningful way.

3. That violates my posted discovery procedures. According to those rules, “For any exhibit to any motion that is more than five pages in length, the parties must highlight the relevant portion of the material for the Court's review. Do not submit a large item in its entirety if an appropriate excerpt may properly present the relevant material.” (Judge Wilner's procedures page at cacd.uscourts.gov.) The defense's submission doesn't come close to complying with my rule. More importantly, the megafiling will prevent me from giving full consideration to the defense's position on the merits of the discovery dispute.

I note that Ms. Fox's hefty declaration itself covers nearly 50 pages of materials. I can't say yet whether the dozens of maps and photos are all directly relevant to the issue at hand, but the burden of wading through them is somewhat less burdensome.

4. Mr. Olsson is ordered to show cause why the Court should not strike the defense submission and grant the discovery motion in full. He may discharge this OSC by promptly revising and resubmitting the materials in a manner that complies with the posted requirements. Please do this by February 6.

5. Due to calendar congestion, the hearing on the motion is moved to Friday, February 24, at 9:30 a.m. In-person attendance is required for any party arguing the motion. Others may attend by video upon request to the Clerk.


Summaries of

L. A. Waterkeeper v. SSA Terminals

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 1, 2023
CV 22-1198 FWS (MRWx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2023)
Case details for

L. A. Waterkeeper v. SSA Terminals

Case Details

Full title:Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. SSA Terminals

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Feb 1, 2023

Citations

CV 22-1198 FWS (MRWx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2023)

Citing Cases

Coastal Envtl. Rights Found. v. Aztec Perlite Co.

The General Permit incorporates a “multiple objective performance measurement system that includes” Numeric…