Laserfiche WebLink
Land Reclamation Board to determine its position prior to this filing. <br />5. The upshot is that the technical review mandated by OSM is focused directly on <br />reclamation of prime farmlands on the Plaintiffs' property—the issues that form the heart of the <br />instant appeal. Revisions to the mining permit as a result of these investigations could have the <br />effect of mooting the instant appeal or narrowing the issues. At the very least, there is an issue <br />as to whether the Board's decision is final for purposes of judicial review in this action. <br />Plaintiffs fully intend to pursue their legal claims in this action and in 10 CV 367. However, <br />there is good cause to retain this action on the docket and stay same pending completion of the <br />administrative actions mandated by OSM. <br />6. Plaintiffs request that this Court retain this case on the docket and that this action be <br />stayed pending completion of the additional studies described herein. Plaintiffs propose to report <br />to the Court 60 days from this date as to the status of the reviews to be undertaken. <br />WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this action be retained on the docket and stayed for <br />a period of time sufficient for the completion of the additional studies specified herein. <br />Respectfully submitted this 12th of August, 2011. <br />DUFFORD, WALDECK, MILBURN & KROHN, L.L.P. <br />By: /s/ Christopher G. McAnany <br />Christopher G. McAnany, #21962 <br />Attorneys for Plaintiffs <br />