Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Environmental organizations Protect the Peninsula's Future, Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat, and Beyond Pesticides filed suit in the Western District of Washington against federal officials including the Secretary of the Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service leaders. The litigation concerned agency actions affecting the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex. The Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe intervened as a defendant and moved to dismiss the case, arguing it was a required party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 and that the action must be dismissed on grounds of tribal sovereign immunity under Rule 12(b)(7).
The district court denied the Tribe's motion to dismiss and subsequently denied its motion for reconsideration. The Tribe appealed both orders to the Ninth Circuit. The Tribe also requested that the court treat its appeal as a petition for a writ of mandamus in the event the court found it lacked appellate jurisdiction. The panel, consisting of Circuit Judges S.R. Thomas, Koh, and Tung, determined the case was suitable for decision without oral argument.
The Court’s Holding
The Ninth Circuit dismissed the Tribe's appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. The court held that the denial of a motion to dismiss is not a final order because it does not end the litigation on the merits, citing Stringfellow v. Concerned Neighbors in Action and Morrison-Knudsen Co. v. CHG International. The court further held that its precedent in Alto v. Black controls: a Rule 19 determination is not immediately appealable because it can be reviewed after final judgment. The collateral order doctrine did not apply because the Tribe's appeal would be properly reviewable following entry of final judgment by the district court.
The court denied the Tribe's request to treat the appeal as a petition for a writ of mandamus. Applying the Bauman factors from Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the court found none of the factors satisfied: the Tribe can appeal after final judgment; there is no clear error requiring mandamus; there is no indication of an oft-repeated error; and the issue is not one of first impression given Alto and similar joinder cases. The court concluded this is not one of the 'really extraordinary causes' warranting the drastic remedy of mandamus.
Key Takeaways
- The denial of a motion to dismiss based on Rule 19 joinder and tribal sovereign immunity is not a final, appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
- The collateral order doctrine does not permit immediate appeal of Rule 19 determinations because such rulings are reviewable after final judgment.
- A writ of mandamus will not issue where the petitioner has an adequate remedy via direct appeal after final judgment and cannot show clear error, persistent disregard of rules, or an issue of first impression.
- Ninth Circuit precedent in Alto v. Black (2013) directly controls the non-appealability of Rule 19 determinations.
- The Tribe must await final judgment in the district court before seeking appellate review of the joinder and sovereign immunity rulings.
Why It Matters
This memorandum disposition reinforces the final judgment rule in the context of tribal sovereign immunity and Rule 19 joinder disputes. By dismissing the appeal and denying mandamus, the Ninth Circuit affirms that interlocutory orders denying dismissal on sovereign immunity grounds—when based on Rule 19 rather than Rule 12(b)(1)—are not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine. The decision clarifies that Alto v. Black remains binding precedent for the proposition that Rule 19 determinations must await final judgment for appellate review, even when tribal sovereign immunity is invoked. This ruling affects environmental litigation in the Ninth Circuit where tribes intervene to assert sovereign immunity as a bar to suit, requiring them to litigate to final judgment before obtaining appellate review of adverse joinder rulings.