Navajo Nation v. United States Forest Service ( 2007 )

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NAVAJO NATION; HAVASUPAI TRIBE;  REX TILOUSI; DIANNA UQUALLA; SIERRA CLUB; WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE NATION; YAVAPAI-APACHE NATION; THE FLAGSTAFF ACTIVIST NETWORK, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and HUALAPAI TRIBE; NORRIS NEZ; BILL BUCKY PRESTON; HOPI TRIBE; No. 06-15371 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, D.C. Nos.  Plaintiffs, CV-05-01824-PGR v. CV-05-01914-PGR UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE; CV-05-01949-PGR NORA RASURE, in her official CV-05-01966-PGR capacity as Forest Supervisor, Responsible Officer, Coconino National Forest; HARV FORSGREN, appeal deciding office, Regional Forester, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees, ARIZONA SNOWBOWL RESORT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-intervenor-Appellee.  14133 14134 NAVAJO NATION v. USFS NAVAJO NATION; HUALAPAI TRIBE;  NORRIS NEZ; BILL BUCKY PRESTON; HAVASUPAI TRIBE; REX TILOUSI; DIANNA UQUALLA; SIERRA CLUB; WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE NATION; YAVAPAI-APACHE NATION; CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY; THE FLAGSTAFF ACTIVIST NETWORK, Plaintiffs, and No. 06-15436 HOPI TRIBE, D.C. Nos.  Plaintiff-Appellant, CV-05-01824-PGR v. CV-05-01914-PGR UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE; CV-05-01949-PGR NORA RASURE, in her official CV-05-01966-PGR capacity as Forest Supervisor, Responsible Officer, Coconino National Forest; HARV FORSGREN, appeal deciding office, Regional Forester, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees, ARIZONA SNOWBOWL RESORT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-intervenor-Appellee.  NAVAJO NATION v. USFS 14135 HUALAPAI TRIBE; NORRIS NEZ; BILL  BUCKY PRESTON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. No. 06-15455 UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE; NORA RASURE, in her official  D.C. No. CV-05-01824-PGR capacity as Forest Supervisor, Responsible Officer, Coconino ORDER National Forest; HARV FORSGREN, appeal deciding office, Regional Forester, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.  Filed October 17, 2007 Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Chief Judge. ORDER Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court,1 it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three- judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court. 1 Judges Hawkins and Bybee are recused. PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.