MountainTrue et al v. United States Forest Service et al

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
Case 1:25-cv-00091-MR-WCM Document 26 Filed 03/24/26 Page 1 of 2

2
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
Case 1:25-cv-00091-MR-WCM Document 26 Filed 03/24/26 Page 2 of 2