California High-Speed Rail Authority v. United States Department of Transportation, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: November 10, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02004
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL No. 2:25-cv-02004-DAD-CKD AUTHORITY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 ORDER DIRECTING THE FILING OF v. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING 14 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF (Doc. No. 15) 15 TRANSPORTATION, et al.,

16 Defendants. 17 18 This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction. (Doc. No. 19 15.) The parties are directed to file joint or separate supplemental briefing addressing the 20 following issues: 21 1. Whether the court must rely on the full administrative record in ruling on plaintiff’s 22 motion for preliminary injunction. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 23 U.S. 402, 420 (1971) (“[I]t is necessary to remand this case to the District Court for 24 plenary review of the Secretary’s decision. That review is to be based on the full 25 administrative record that was before the Secretary at the time he made his decision.”); see 26 also American Bioscience, Inc. v. Thompson, 243 F.3d 579, 582 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (“The 27 review must ‘be based on the full administrative record that was before the [FDA] at the 28 time [it] made its decision.’”) (quoting Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 1 U.S. 402, 420 (1971)); Doe #1 v. Trump, 423 F. Supp. 3d 1040, 1046-47 (D. Or. 2019). 2 2. Whether, the parties would agree to stipulate to the court ruling on plaintiff's motion for 3 preliminary injunction based upon an incomplete administrative record. See Earth Island 4 Inst. v. Muldoon, 82 F.4th 624, 631 (9th Cir. 2023) (“The parties agreed to an expedited 5 briefing schedule that would resolve the preliminary injunction motion before the Agency 6 was required to produce the complete administrative record.”); Nat'l Urb. League v. Ross, 7 489 F. Supp. 3d 939, 960 (N.D. Cal.) (“Because of the exigency of the motion for 8 preliminary injunction and the imminent September 30, 2020 deadline for data collection, 9 the parties stipulated to an incomplete administrative record for purposes of the instant 10 motion.”), order clarified, 491 F. Supp. 3d 572 (N.D. Cal. 2020). 11 The parties shall file joint or separate supplement briefing addressing only these issues no 12 || later than November 14, 2025. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: _ November 10, 2025 Dal A. 2d, aryek 15 DALE A. DROZD 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28