Baykeeper v. United States Fish and Wildlife
San Francisco Baykeeper; California Sportfishing Protection Alliance; Restore the Delta; and Friends of the River v. United States Fish and Wildlife
- Cisneros
- 3:25-cv-01360
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 8
In San Francisco Baykeeper v. United States Fish and Wildlife, the court granted a deadline-extension motion; Judge Cisneros ordered filing by July 16, 2026.
The defendants—the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, its Director in an official capacity, and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior in an official capacity—received additional time to submit the required finding. The plaintiffs’ petition remains subject to the new July 16, 2026 deadline.
What happened
San Francisco Baykeeper, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Restore the Delta, and Friends of the River challenged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s obligation to issue a finding on their petition to list the San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon as threatened. An earlier judgment required the finding to be submitted for publication by June 3, 2026.
The defendants asked for a 43-day extension because a lapse in appropriations from October 1 through November 12, 2025, stopped the Service’s work on the finding. The plaintiffs did not oppose the request.
The court granted the defendants’ motion and relieved them from the June 3 deadline. Judge Cisneros ordered the defendants to submit the finding for publication in the Federal Register no later than July 16, 2026.
The detailed version
- Baykeeper v. United States Fish and Wildlife · No. 3:25-cv-01360
- Cisneros
- Dec. 23, 2025
Background
The case concerns the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s duty under Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(3)(B), to make a finding on the plaintiffs’ petition to list the San Francisco Estuary population of white sturgeon as threatened.
The court’s September 3, 2025 order and final judgment required the defendants to submit the finding for publication in the Federal Register by June 3, 2026. The defendants moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5) and (6) for a 43-day extension, which would move the deadline to July 16, 2026. The plaintiffs did not oppose the motion.
Reasons for the requested extension
The defendants stated that the Service had begun work toward the June 3 deadline, including assembling a team to conduct a Species Status Assessment, seeking information from interested parties, reviewing scientific literature, and developing an analytical approach.
According to the motion and supporting declaration, appropriations for the Service lapsed after September 30, 2025, and were not restored until late on November 12, 2025. During that 43-day period, Service employees could not work on the finding except in limited circumstances. The Service therefore stopped work on the petition and resumed after funding was restored.
The defendants argued that the lapse made compliance with the June 3 deadline legally impermissible for a period and made the remaining schedule substantially more difficult. They requested an extension equal to the number of days lost.
Ruling
The court granted the defendants’ unopposed motion for a 43-day extension of time to comply with the judgment. The court relieved the defendants from the June 3, 2026 deadline and ordered and enjoined them to submit for Federal Register publication the finding on the plaintiffs’ white-sturgeon petition no later than July 16, 2026.
The order does not decide whether the white sturgeon population should be listed as threatened. It changes the deadline for the Service to submit its finding.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.