MountainTrue, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, and Defenders of Wildlife v. United States Forest Service and Forest Supervisor James Melonas

• Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
• Decided: March 24, 2026
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00091
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL CASE NO. 1:25-cv-00091-MR-WCM

MOUNTAINTRUE, SIERRA CLUB, ) CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL ) DIVERSITY, and DEFENDERS OF ) WILDLIFE, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) MEMORANDUM OF ) DECISION AND ORDER ) UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE ) and FOREST SUPERVISOR ) JAMES MELONAS, ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________ )

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Limited Surreply [Doc. 19]. The Plaintiffs seek leave to file a surreply in support of their response in opposition to the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. [Doc. 19]. The Defendants oppose the Plaintiff’s Motion. [Doc. 24]. The Local Rules provide that surreplies “are neither anticipated nor allowed by this Rule, but leave of Court may be sought to file a surreply when warranted.” LCvR 7.1(e). “Generally, courts allow a party to file a surreply only when fairness dictates based on new arguments raised in the previous reply.” DiPaulo v. Potter, 733 F. Supp. 2d 666, 670 (M.D.N.C. 2010). The Court does not find that fairness so dictates here. The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss has been fully briefed, and the Court is more than capable of discerning the positions of the parties from the briefs that have already been filed. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Limited Surreply [Doc. 19] is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed: March 24, 2026

Martifi Reidinger ey Chief United States District Judge Ale