Case: Ducey v. Moore

2:22-cv-01814 | U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Filed Date: Oct. 21, 2022

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case involved a challenge to the federal government’s jurisdiction over land at Arizona’s border with Mexico and the then-Governor's efforts to build a border wall. The Governor of Arizona, Doug Ducey, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona on October 21, 2022. Defendants included the Secretary of Agriculture (Thomas J. Vilsack), the Chief of the US Forest Service (Randy Moore, and the agency), and the Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Camille Calim…

This case involved a challenge to the federal government’s jurisdiction over land at Arizona’s border with Mexico and the then-Governor's efforts to build a border wall.

The Governor of Arizona, Doug Ducey, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona on October 21, 2022. Defendants included the Secretary of Agriculture (Thomas J. Vilsack), the Chief of the US Forest Service (Randy Moore, and the agency), and the Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Camille Calimlim Touton, and the agency). Judge David G. Campbell was assigned to the case.

The complaint alleged that Arizona’s southern border was in an “unprecedented crisis” as “[c]ountless migrants are crossing unsecured areas of the border” leading to “a mix of drug, crime, and humanitarian issues[.]” They further alleged that the halt to border wall construction in early 2021 had “left numerous gaps” that “fail to provide a meaningful barrier across the State, making it significantly easier for foreign nationals to cross illegally[.]” As such, Arizona had taken numerous actions prior to the filing of this complaint. The state legislature had authorized $400 million in funding to fill these “gaps” effective on July 1, 2022. The following month, the governor authorized the Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs to use this funding to close the gaps. This included a temporary measure of “double-stacking multi-ton shipping containers[.]” However, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and the U.S. Forest Service asserted jurisdiction over the lands at the border and refused to authorize Arizona to construct any further barriers.

Arizona asserted six claims:

First, they argued that Proclamation 758 issued in 1907 by President Roosevelt exceeded executive power granted under Article II. The Proclamation declared all land within 60 feet of the Mexican border as federal public land (hereinafter: Roosevelt Reservation). Arizona argued that the Proclamation was unlawful as Article II did not expressly authorize the president to act on this without congressional approval. As such, federal agencies like BOR and the Forest Service lacked jurisdiction. Further, Arizona did not need to exhaust administrative remedies as they were challenging the legal status of the Roosevelt Reservation and not an agency decision.

Second, they argued that the federal agencies’ action was exceeded authority. They cited a March 2006 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The MOU stated that the Roosevelt Reservation was “outside the oversight or control of land managers.” As the Forest Service and BOR are part of the USDA and DOI respectively, they effectively agreed and accordingly must abide by the MOU and thus lack jurisdiction. In addition, the MOU stated that DHS and its components are statutorily mandated to control and guard the nation’s borders.

Third, they argued that Arizona at least has concurrent jurisdiction with the federal government over the Roosevelt Reservation. They cited U.S. Supreme Court precedent stating that a state generally has complete jurisdiction over lands within its exterior borders. Additionally, they argued that since Arizona was admitted to the Union in 1912, 5 years after the Proclamation at issue, the US did not retain exclusive jurisdiction.

Fourth, they argued that the federal agencies’ blockage of Arizona’s actions violated Article I and Article IV of the U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 10 authorizes states when “actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger” to take certain actions to protect themselves. Article IV Section 4 requires that the federal government “protect each of the [States] against Invasion[.]” For this, Arizona argued that the federal government was blocking Arizona’s constitutional right to defend itself while abdicating their responsibility under Article IV.

Fifth, Arizona argued that even if they don’t have concurrent jurisdiction over the Roosevelt Reservation, it is at most an easement over the state’s underlying possession of the land. As such, the federal government’s attempt to exert exclusive jurisdiction over the area is unlawful.

Finally, they briefly asserted a nuisance claim, arguing that the border situation and the “criminal and humanitarian crises” arising from it harm the state’s wellbeing.

Arizona sought an injunction barring the defendants from attempting to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over the Roosevelt Reservation and to allow Arizona to take action in the area both separately and in coordination with federal partners. Arizona sought various forms of declaratory relief. First, that the Roosevelt Reservation was unconstitutional. Second, that Arizona retained the constitutional authority to take remedial action to fill the “gaps” in its border. Third, that neither the Forest Service nor BOR possessed exclusive jurisdiction over the Roosevelt Reservation, and that the agencies at most had concurrent jurisdiction or in the alternative, the Roosevelt Reservation is only an easement. Finally, a declaration that the border situation constituted a nuisance under the law.

No significant actions occurred in the case prior to the state gubernatorial election on November 8, 2022.

The federal government filed a motion to dismiss the case on November 23, 2022. The federal government argued that Arizona was barred from challenging the Roosevelt Reservation by federal sovereign immunity, and that even if the federal government waived sovereign immunity, Arizona would still fail because the statute of limitations prevents any challenge to the Roosevelt Reservation, the Reservation was a valid exercise of executive authority, and that the Reservation did not divest land from state ownership. In addition, the federal government did not and could not have divested themselves of jurisdiction over federal lands through the Memorandum of Understanding. Arizona's claim of concurrent jurisdiction failed to give Governor Ducey the authority to occupy and use federal lands absent the consent of Congress. The federal government argued that Arizona's remaining claims raised non-justiciable political questions.

Arizona filed a response on December 23, 2022, reiterating its complaint and pressing the urgency of the border crisis.

This case is ongoing, however, Governor-elect Katie Hobbs consistently opposed construction of the wall during her campaign.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Eric Gripp (11/28/2022)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65598102/parties/ducey-v-moore/

Judge(s)

Campbell, David G. (Arizona)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Ahler, Colin Patrick (Arizona)

Foster, Anni Lori (Arizona)

Attorney for Defendant

Alexander, Tyler McVeigh (Arizona)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Fink, Marc D (Arizona)

Judge(s)

Campbell, David G. (Arizona)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Ahler, Colin Patrick (Arizona)

Foster, Anni Lori (Arizona)

Johnson, Brett William (Arizona)

Regula, Ryan James (Arizona)

Warner, Charlene A (Arizona)

Attorney for Defendant

Alexander, Tyler McVeigh (Arizona)

Pettigrew, Shaun M (Arizona)

Smith, Andrew Allen (Arizona)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Fink, Marc D (Arizona)

Williams, Michael Ryan (Arizona)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1 2:22-cv-01814	Complaint	Oct. 21, 2022	Oct. 21, 2022 Complaint

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65598102/ducey-v-moore/

Last updated March 9, 2024, 3:06 a.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 402.00, receipt number AAZDC-21229236 filed by Douglas A Ducey. (Johnson, Brett) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit)(MCO) (Entered: 10/21/2022) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on PACER 2 Exhibit View on PACER 3 Exhibit View on PACER	Oct. 21, 2022	Oct. 21, 2022 Clearinghouse
2	Corporate Disclosure Statement by Douglas A Ducey. (Johnson, Brett) (MCO) (Entered: 10/21/2022)	Oct. 21, 2022	Oct. 21, 2022 RECAP
3	SUMMONS Submitted by Douglas A Ducey. (Johnson, Brett) (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons, # 4 Summons)(MCO) (Entered: 10/21/2022)	Oct. 21, 2022	Oct. 21, 2022 PACER
4	Filing fee paid, receipt number AAZDC-21229236. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Deborah M Fine. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-22-1814-PHX-DMF. Magistrate Election form attached. (MCO) (Entered: 10/21/2022)	Oct. 21, 2022	Oct. 21, 2022 RECAP
5	Summons Issued as to Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons, # 4 Summons)(MCO). *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document. (Entered: 10/21/2022)	Oct. 21, 2022	Oct. 21, 2022 PACER
6	MOTION to Intervene by Center for Biological Diversity. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Answer, # 2 Proposed Order)(Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/02/2022) 1 Proposed Answer View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	Nov. 2, 2022	Nov. 2, 2022 RECAP
7	DECLARATION of Dr. Robin Silver re: 6 MOTION to Intervene by Intervenor Defendant Center for Biological Diversity. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H)(Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/02/2022) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER 3 Exhibit C View on PACER 4 Exhibit D View on PACER 5 Exhibit E View on PACER 6 Exhibit F View on PACER 7 Exhibit G View on PACER 8 Exhibit H View on PACER	Nov. 2, 2022	Nov. 2, 2022 RECAP
8	DECLARATION of Russ McSpadden re: 6 MOTION to Intervene by Intervenor Defendant Center for Biological Diversity. (Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/02/2022)	Nov. 2, 2022	Nov. 2, 2022 PACER
9	Corporate Disclosure Statement by Center for Biological Diversity. (Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/02/2022)	Nov. 2, 2022	Nov. 2, 2022 PACER
10	Additional Attachments to Main Document re: 6 MOTION to Intervene Certificate of Service by Intervenor Defendant Center for Biological Diversity. (Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/02/2022)	Nov. 2, 2022	Nov. 2, 2022 PACER
12	Party Elects Assignment of Case to District Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) (Entered: 11/04/2022)	Nov. 3, 2022	Nov. 3, 2022 PACER
13	MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(b), a request has been received for a random reassignment of this case to a District Judge. FURTHER ORDERED Case reassigned by random draw to Judge David G Campbell. All further pleadings/papers should now list the following COMPLETE case number: CV-22-1814-PHX-DGC. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) (Entered: 11/04/2022)	Nov. 4, 2022	Nov. 4, 2022 PACER
	25 Pct Mag - Election to Assign Case to District Judge	Nov. 4, 2022	Nov. 4, 2022 PACER
	~Util - Add and Terminate Judges AND Minute Order	Nov. 4, 2022	Nov. 4, 2022 PACER
14	RESPONSE in Opposition re: 6 MOTION to Intervene filed by Douglas A Ducey. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-B)(Johnson, Brett) (Entered: 11/16/2022)	Nov. 16, 2022	Nov. 16, 2022 PACER
15	NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Andrew A. Smith appearing for Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. . (Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 11/16/2022)	Nov. 16, 2022	Nov. 16, 2022 PACER
16	RESPONSE to Motion re: 6 MOTION to Intervene filed by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 11/16/2022)	Nov. 16, 2022	Nov. 16, 2022 PACER
	Remark: Pro hac vice motion(s) granted for Marc D Fink on behalf of Movant Center for Biological Diversity. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS)	Nov. 21, 2022	Nov. 21, 2022 PACER
	Remark re Pro Hac Vice Motion	Nov. 21, 2022	Nov. 21, 2022 PACER
17	REPLY to Response to Motion re: 6 MOTION to Intervene filed by Center for Biological Diversity. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Declaration of Russ McSpadden)(Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/22/2022) 1 Supplemental Declaration of Russ McSpadden View on PACER	Nov. 22, 2022	Nov. 22, 2022 RECAP
18	NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Shaun M. Pettigrew appearing for Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. . (Pettigrew, Shaun) (Entered: 11/23/2022)	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
19	NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Tyler M. Alexander appearing for Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. . (Alexander, Tyler) (Entered: 11/23/2022)	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
20	Consent MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages for Motion to Dismiss by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 11/23/2022)	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
21	FILED at Doc. 24 LODGED Proposed Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support re: 20 Consent MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages for Motion to Dismiss . Document to be filed by Clerk if Motion or Stipulation for Leave to File or Amend is granted. Filed by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A -- October 13, 2022 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Letter)(Smith, Andrew) *Modified on 11/28/2022 (MAP). (Entered: 11/23/2022) 1 Exhibit A -- October 13, 2022 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Letter View on PACER	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 RECAP
22	ORDER granting 6 Motion to Intervene. Permissive intervention is granted under Rule 24(b). The Court concludes that Intervenor has defenses that share with the main action a common question of law or fact -- whether the federal government may act with respect to the border lands of Arizona, including in the enforcement of federal environmental statutes. Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(1)(B). The Court will hold Intervenor to its commitment not to unduly complicate this case, delay the proceedings, inject irrelevant issues, or repeat arguments made by the federal defendants. Doc. 17 at 12. The purpose of granting this intervention is not to convert this case into an environmental enforcement action or launch into broad ranging discovery on environmental issues. The purpose is to enable Intervenor to provide input on the claims and issues raised by Plaintiff. Intervenor shall file its proposed answer in the form submitted to the Court (Doc. 6-1) by December 2, 2022. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 11-23-22. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (DGC) (Entered: 11/23/2022)	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
23	ORDER granting Defendants' 20 Unopposed Motion for Page Extension for Motion to Dismiss. The Clerk's Office is directed to file the Motion to Dismiss lodged at Doc. 21 . Ordered by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 11/23/2022. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (CLB) (Entered: 11/23/2022)	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
24	MOTION to Dismiss Case by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(MAP) (Entered: 11/28/2022) 1 Exhibit A View on RECAP	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 RECAP
	Order on Motion to Intervene	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
	Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022 PACER
25	ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Center for Biological Diversity.(Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/28/2022)	Nov. 28, 2022	Nov. 28, 2022 RECAP
26	RESPONSE to Motion re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Center for Biological Diversity. (Fink, Marc) (Entered: 11/30/2022)	Nov. 30, 2022	Nov. 30, 2022 RECAP
27	MINUTE ORDER: A Telephonic Status Conference is set for 12/21/2022 at 04:00 PM in Courtroom 603, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Senior Judge David G Campbell. Counsel will receive a dial-in number by email. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (CLB) (Entered: 12/14/2022)	Dec. 14, 2022	Dec. 14, 2022 PACER
	~Util - Set/Reset Hearings AND Minute Order	Dec. 14, 2022	Dec. 14, 2022 PACER
28	MOTION to Transfer Related Case, MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Associated Cases: CV-2:22-01814-PHX-DGC, CV-2:22-02107-PHX-SMB) (Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 12/15/2022)	Dec. 15, 2022	Dec. 15, 2022 PACER
29	SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Douglas A Ducey: Certified Mail Receipt re: Summons, Complaint, Civil Cover Sheet and Preliminary Order upon Thomas J. Vilsack, United States Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation on 11/14/22. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits A-C)(Johnson, Brett) (Entered: 12/19/2022)	Dec. 19, 2022	Dec. 19, 2022 PACER
30	SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Douglas A Ducey: Proof of Service re: Summons, Complaint, Civil Cover Sheet and Preliminary Order upon Gary M. Restaino, U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona on 11/8/22. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Johnson, Brett) (Entered: 12/19/2022)	Dec. 19, 2022	Dec. 19, 2022 PACER
31	NOTICE re: of Filing of Stipulation in Realted Case by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack . (Attachments: # 1 Attachment (Stipulation of the Parties in 2:22-cv-02107-PHX-SMB))(Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 12/21/2022)	Dec. 21, 2022	Dec. 21, 2022 PACER
32	MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Senior Judge David G Campbell: Telephonic Conference held on 12/21/2022 re: pending motions (Docs. 24 and 28 ). The Court advises counsel that it has also reviewed the Notice re: Stipulation (Doc. 31 ). Discussion held regarding Plaintiff's response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 24 ). IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel shall file a response to said motion (not to exceed 34 pages) no later than December 23, 2022. Defendants' Reply shall be filed no later than January 17, 2023. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing counsel to file a joint status report no later than January 17, 2023, advising the Court regarding the status of the case in light of the stipulation filed in United States v. Ducey, CV 22-02107-PHX-SMB. Regarding the Motion to Transfer and Consolidate (Doc. 28 ), Plaintiff's counsel advises the Court that a Response in opposition will be filed by December 29, 2022; Defendants' Reply shall be filed no later than January 5, 2023. APPEARANCES: Anni Foster, Brett Johnson and Ryan Regula (all appearing telephonically) for Plaintiff. Shaun Pettigrew and Andrew Smith (both appearing telephonically) for Defendants. Mark Fink (appearing telephonically) for Intervenor Defendant. Also present telephonically: Kwan Piensook with the US Attorney's Office. (Court Reporter Teri Veres) Hearing held 4:01 PM to 4:17 PM. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAW) (Entered: 12/21/2022)	Dec. 21, 2022	Dec. 21, 2022 PACER
	1 - Common Prompts (Text Only) AND ~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings AND Telephone Conference	Dec. 22, 2022	Dec. 22, 2022 PACER
	~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings AND 1 - Common Prompts (Text Only) AND Telephone Conference	Dec. 22, 2022	Dec. 22, 2022 PACER
	1 - Common Prompts (Text Only) AND Telephone Conference AND ~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings	Dec. 22, 2022	Dec. 22, 2022 PACER
33	RESPONSE in Opposition re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Douglas A Ducey. (Johnson, Brett) (Entered: 12/23/2022)	Dec. 23, 2022	Dec. 23, 2022 RECAP
34	Response to Motion to Consolidate/Transfer Cases	Dec. 28, 2022	Dec. 28, 2022 PACER
35	MOTION to File Amicus Curiae by Advocates for Victims of Illegal Alien Crime. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment, # 2 Attachment, # 3 Attachment)(Williams, Michael) Modified to correct event, filer, and text on 1/3/2023 (REK). (Entered: 12/30/2022) 1 Attachment View on PACER 2 Attachment View on RECAP 3 Attachment View on PACER	Dec. 30, 2022	Dec. 30, 2022 RECAP
36	EX PARTE MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Douglas A Ducey. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Johnson, Brett) (Entered: 01/02/2023) 1 Exhibit Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 2, 2023	Jan. 2, 2023 PACER
37	STIPULATION to Stay Deadlines by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Pettigrew, Shaun) (Entered: 01/03/2023) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 3, 2023	Jan. 3, 2023 RECAP
38	ORDER. The parties have filed a stipulation to stay all deadlines in this case to allow time for the new Governor and Attorney General to review the status of the case and consider its potential resolution. Doc. 37. The case deadlines include Federal Defendants' reply in support of their motion to dismiss and reply in support of their motion to transfer and consolidate. Id. The Court will grant the request made in the stipulation. All deadlines in this case are stayed. The parties shall file a joint status report no later than 30 days from the date of this order advising the Court on the status of this case and proposing further proceedings. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 1-3-23. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (DGC) (Entered: 01/03/2023)	Jan. 3, 2023	Jan. 3, 2023 PACER
	Order	Jan. 4, 2023	Jan. 4, 2023 PACER
	Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney	Jan. 4, 2023	Jan. 4, 2023 PACER
	Notice of Deficiency (Text Only)	Jan. 4, 2023	Jan. 4, 2023 PACER
41	Corporate Disclosure Statement	Jan. 5, 2023	Jan. 5, 2023 RECAP
42	Transfer Related Case 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 23, 2023	Jan. 23, 2023 RECAP
43	ORDER granting (42 in case 2:22-cv-01814-DGC) Motion to Transfer Related Case. Case No. 22-cv-02107-PHX-SMB is transferred to the undersigned Judge and orders that the case be renumbered 22-cv-02107-PHX-DGC. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 1/25/2023. (Associated Cases: 2:22-cv-01814-DGC, 2:22-cv-02107-SMB) (KJ) (Entered: 01/27/2023)	Jan. 27, 2023	Jan. 27, 2023 PACER
44	Joint Status Report and Stipulation to Continue Stays by United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Smith, Andrew) Modified to correct text on 2/3/2023 (SLQ). (Entered: 02/02/2023) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Feb. 2, 2023	Feb. 2, 2023 RECAP
45	ORDER - THIS MATTER came before the Court on the Parties' February 2, 2023 "Status Report and Stipulation to Continue Stays" in the above-captioned cases. The Court, being advised of the premises, finds that the Stipulation is well- taken and GRANTS the Stipulation, as follows: 1. All deadlines in these cases continue to be stayed; 2. The parties are directed to file a joint status report no later than 90 days from the date of this order advising the Court on the status of the cases and proposing further proceedings. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 2/2/2023. (SLQ) (Entered: 02/03/2023)	Feb. 3, 2023	Feb. 3, 2023 RECAP
46	Joint MOTION to Stay re: 45 Order "The Parties' Status Report and Stipulation to Continue Stays" by United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 05/02/2023)	May 2, 2023	May 2, 2023 PACER
47	ORDER - THIS MATTER came before the Court on the Parties' May 2, 2023 "Status Report and Stipulation to Continue Stays" in the above-captioned cases. The Court, being advised of the premises, finds that the Stipulation is well-taken and GRANTS the Stipulation, as follows: 1. All deadlines in these cases continue to be stayed. 2. The parties are directed to file a joint status report no later than August 23, 2023 advising the Court on the status of the cases and proposing further proceedings. 3. The Court will hold a telephonic status conference on August 29, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 5/2/23. (SLQ) (Entered: 05/02/2023)	May 2, 2023	May 2, 2023 RECAP
48	STATUS REPORT (Joint) by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Pettigrew, Shaun) (Entered: 08/23/2023) 1 Proposed Order View on RECAP	Aug. 23, 2023	Aug. 23, 2023 RECAP
49	ORDER: All deadlines in this case continue to be stayed. The status conference scheduled for 8/29/2023, is vacated. If the above-captioned cases have not been voluntarily withdrawn by 9/26/2023, the Parties shall file another joint status report on that date. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 8/24/2023. (KJ) (Entered: 08/24/2023)	Aug. 24, 2023	Aug. 24, 2023 PACER
50	STIPULATION of Dismissal by Randy Moore, Camille Calimlim Touton, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Forest Service, Thomas J Vilsack. (Smith, Andrew) (Entered: 09/15/2023)	Sept. 15, 2023	Sept. 15, 2023 PACER
51	ORDER DISMISSING CASE: Pursuant to the parties' Stipulation of Dismissal 50, IT IS ORDERED that the stay in this case is lifted, this matter is dismissed without prejudice, all pending deadlines are vacated, and all pending motions are denied as moot. The Clerk is directed to terminate this matter. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 9/15/23. (CLB) (Entered: 09/15/2023)	Sept. 15, 2023	Sept. 15, 2023 RECAP