%PDF-1.3
%%
%%Page: 1 1
4 0 obj
<<
/Length 5 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 Tm
/F1 13 Tf 100 Tz
88.1395 -9.1 Td
1.3 Tw
0 Tc
(FOR PUBLICATION) Tj
/F1 15 Tf 100 Tz
-78.2395 -24 Td
1.5 Tw
(UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS) Tj
43.47 -16 Td
(FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-53.37 -18 Td
1.2 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
0 0 Td
183.8 0 Td
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-2.18 -17.6 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -2.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
2.12 Tw
( ) Tj
.79 Tw
(OF) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( W) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(INTUN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NDIANS) Tj
2.12 Tw
( ) Tj
.79 Tw
(OF) Tj
2.12 Tw
( ) Tj
.79 Tw
(THE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUSA) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NDIAN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OMMUNITY) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, a federally recognized) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(Indian Tribe,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
80.988 -13.2 Td
(Plaintiff-Appellant,) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
134.082 -6.6 Td
(No. 06-16145) Tj
-132.57 -11.4 Td
(v.) Tj
144.234 -6.6 Td
(D.C. No.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-45.114 -7.9 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -3.5 Td
1.2 Tw
(S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(TATE OF) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(; C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
202.002 -1.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(CV-04-02265-FCD) Tj
-202.002 -11.4 Td
(G) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AMBLING) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ONTROL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OMMISSION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(,) Tj
224.34 -6.6 Td
(OPINION) Tj
-224.34 -6.6 Td
(an agency of the State of) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(California; and A) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(RNOLD) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(CHWARZENEGGER) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, Governor of the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(State of California,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
65.688 -13.2 Td
(Defendants-Appellees.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
115.932 -8.8 Td
1.6 Ts
2 Tw
() Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-142.878 -26.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(Appeal from the United States District Court) Tj
21.108 -13.2 Td
(for the Eastern District of California) Tj
-17.178 -13.2 Td
(Frank C. Damrell, District Judge, Presiding) Tj
51.798 -26.2 Td
(Argued and Submitted) Tj
-34.092 -13.2 Td
(April 9, 2008Pasadena, California) Tj
37.152 -26.2 Td
(Filed August 8, 2008) Tj
-84.978 -26.2 Td
(Before: William) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(C.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Canby,) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Jr., Andrew) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(J.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Kleinfeld, and) Tj
66.084 -13.2 Td
(Jay) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(S.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Bybee, Circuit Judges.) Tj
9.732 -26.2 Td
(Opinion by Judge Canby) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 cm
0 G
.9 w 0 -66.65 m 183.8 -66.65 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -157.2 m 186.6 -74.5 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -256.9 m 186.6 -174.2 l s
.9 w 0 -263.85 m 183.3 -263.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
292.25 -664.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10159) Tj
ET
Q
endstream
endobj
5 0 obj
3615
endobj
3 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F3 8 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 4 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 2 2
12 0 obj
<<
/Length 13 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
120.996 -27.6 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(COUNSEL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-120.996 -26.2 Td
1.71 Tw
(George Forman, Forman & Associates, San Rafael, Califor-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(nia, for the plaintiff-appellant. ) Tj
0 -26.2 Td
.66 Tw
(Christine M. Murphy, Deputy Attorney General, Sacramento,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.81 Tw
(California \(briefs\); Peter H. Kaufman, Deputy Attorney Gen-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
7.85 Tw
(eral, San Diego, California \(oral argument\); for the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(defendants-appellees. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
123.666 -44.2 Td
(OPINION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-123.666 -26.2 Td
(CANBY, Circuit Judge: ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
1.58 Tw
(This appeal concerns the joinder requirements of Rule 19) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
.02 Tw
(of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and their effect on liti-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.18 Tw
(gation brought by an Indian tribe engaged in casino gaming.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.66 Tw
(The Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.28 Tw
(Indian Community \() Tj
(Colusa) Tj
(\), a federally recognized Indian) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.1 Tw
(tribe, entered into a gaming compact with the State of Califor-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.14 Tw
(nia in 1999. Colusa brought this action for declaratory and) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.18 Tw
(injunctive relief against the State, its Governor and the Cali-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
5.6 Tw
(fornia Gambling Control Commission \(collectively, ) Tj
(the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.5 Tw
(State\). Colusa challenges the Commission's interpretation of) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.25 Tw
(the compact and the Commission's assumption of authority to) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
4.21 Tw
(administer unilaterally the licensing of electronic gaming) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.37 Tw
(devices. The district court concluded that the many other) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.83 Tw
(Indian tribes that had entered into identical gaming compacts) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.28 Tw
(with the State in 1999, as well as California's non-gaming) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.66 Tw
(tribes, were required parties to this action. Because Indian) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.33 Tw
(tribes enjoy sovereign ) Tj
(immunity and the action could not pro-) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -8.15 m 300 -8.15 l s
.5 w 0 -157.55 m 300 -157.55 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10163) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
13 0 obj
2810
endobj
11 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 12 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 3 3
15 0 obj
<<
/Length 16 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.52 Tw
0 Tc
(ceed in their absence, the district court granted the State's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
5.37 Tw
(motion for judgment on the pleadings. Colusa appeals.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.74 Tw
(Because we conclude that the absent tribes are not required) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.74 Tw
(parties to this action, we reverse the district court's judgment) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.5 Tw
(\(with one minor exception\) and remand for further proceed-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(ings. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
106.002 -26.1 Td
(BACKGROUND) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-94.002 -26.1 Td
1.61 Tw
(In 1988, Congress enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.22 Tw
(Act \() Tj
(IGRA) Tj
(\) ) Tj
(to provide a statutory basis for the operation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.33 Tw
(of gaming by Indian tribes as a means of promoting tribal) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.6 Tw
(economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.11 Tw
(governments. 25 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.11 Tw
(2702\(1\). IGRA recognizes three) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.8 Tw
(classes of gaming. 25 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.8 Tw
(2703\(6\)-\(8\). Slot machines) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.12 Tw
(and equivalent gaming devices, which are the exclusive sub-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.16 Tw
(ject of this litigation, are Class III games. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(25 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.66 Tw
(2703\(7\)\(B\)\(ii\), \(8\). Under the statute, a tribe may conduct) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.16 Tw
(Class III gaming activities only ) Tj
(in conformance with a) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.03 Tw
(Tribal-State compact entered into by the Indian tribe.) Tj
( 25) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(2710\(d\)\(1\)\(C\). ) Tj
12 -26.1 Td
.78 Tw
(In September 1999, Colusa entered into a gaming compact) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
.44 Tw
(\(the ) Tj
(Compact) Tj
(\) with the State of California, which sets forth) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1 Tw
(various provisions relating to the operation of Class III gam-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.71 Tw
(ing devices. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Tribal-State Gaming Compact Between the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.4 Tw
(Colusa Indian Community and the State of California \(Oct. 8,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.25 Tw
(1999\). At the same time, sixty-two other tribes \(the ) Tj
(Compact) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.88 Tw
(Tribes) Tj
(\) executed virtually identical bilateral compacts with) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.08 Tw
(the State \(the ) Tj
(1999 Compacts) Tj
(\).) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(1) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Artichoke Joe's Cal.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.32 Tw
(Grand Casino v. Norton) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 353 F.3d 712, 717-18 \(9th Cir.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
4.28 Tw
(2003\). The 1999 Compacts limit the number of gaming) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.96 Tw
(devices operated by each tribe to 2,000. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(1999 Compacts,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.71 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.71 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(a\). They also establish a formula setting a statewide) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.57 Tw
(maximum number of gaming devices that all Compact Tribes) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
9.91 Tw
(1) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(A generic copy of a 1999 Compact is available at) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/enabling/tsc.pdf \(last visited July 31, 2008\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -466.55 m 300 -466.55 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10164) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
16 0 obj
4063
endobj
14 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 15 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 4 4
19 0 obj
<<
/Length 20 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.03 Tw
0 Tc
(may license in the aggregate under the 1999 Compacts. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13 Td
1.2 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(a\)\(1\). ) Tj
12 -26 Td
1.14 Tw
(A Compact Tribe, however, is not free to choose unilater-) Tj
-12 -13 Td
1.57 Tw
(ally how many gaming devices to operate, even if it wishes) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.14 Tw
(to operate fewer devices than the 2,000 limit. The Compacts) Tj
0 -13 Td
.85 Tw
(establish a threshold number of devices that tribes may oper-) Tj
0 -13 Td
.97 Tw
(ate without a license. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.97 Tw
(4.3.1. In Colusa's case, that num-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.53 Tw
(ber was set at the number of gaming devices, 523, operated) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(by the Tribe on September 1, 1999. For each additional gam-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
5.33 Tw
(ing device, Colusa is required to obtain a license. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
1.9 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.9 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(a\). These licenses are distributed among the Com-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.47 Tw
(pact Tribes who apply to obtain them pursuant to a detailed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.5 Tw
(draw process. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.5 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(a\)\(3\). Under this process, a) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.25 Tw
(Compact Tribe's likelihood of being awarded a license hinges) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.63 Tw
(on its placement in one of five priority tiers. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Placement in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.42 Tw
(a particular tier depends in partthough not exclusively) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.36 Tw
(upon the number of gaming devices already operated by the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.37 Tw
(tribe; the fewer gaming devices a tribe operates, the higher its) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.93 Tw
(priority tier. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( If, in any given round, more licenses are) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.85 Tw
(requested in aggregate by the Compact Tribes than the Com-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(mission is distributing, the license draw process is structured) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.02 Tw
(to award the bulk of those licenses to the Compact Tribes who) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(have not yet developed large gaming operations. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
12 -26 Td
2.85 Tw
(In 2001, then-Governor Gray Davis issued an executive) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.66 Tw
(order requiring the California Gambling Control Commission) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.41 Tw
(\() Tj
(Commission) Tj
(\) to take control of the licensing of gaming) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(devices. Exec. Order No. D-29-01 \(Mar. 8, 2001\). Previously,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.42 Tw
(a tribal administrator had conducted gaming device license) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.75 Tw
(draws. As soon as the Commission assumed control, it) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.83 Tw
(declared the licenses issued in previous draws invalid and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(replaced them with licenses issued by the Commission. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.52 Tw
(The 1999 Compacts also envision a revenue-sharing mech-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.71 Tw
(anism for the benefit of California's non-gaming tribes. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
3 Tw
(1999 Compacts, ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
3 Tw
(4.3.2.1. In order to acquire licenses for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(gaming devices in excess of their initial allowance, Compact) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10165) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
20 0 obj
4051
endobj
18 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 19 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 5 5
22 0 obj
<<
/Length 23 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.05 Tw
0 Tc
(Tribes must pay ) Tj
(a non-refundable one-time pre-payment fee) Tj
() Tj
0 -13.4 Td
5.96 Tw
(of $1,250 for each gaming device being licensed. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.4 Td
1.81 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.81 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(e\). In addition, in order to keep their licenses cur-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.11 Tw
(rent, Compact Tribes must pay annual fees for each licensed) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.08 Tw
(device in accordance with a pre-determined fee schedule. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.4 Td
1.71 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.71 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(a\)\(2\). The fees are to be deposited in the Revenue) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.96 Tw
(Sharing Trust Fund \() Tj
(Revenue Fund) Tj
(\), a fund created by the) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.22 Tw
(California State Legislature and administered by the Commis-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.25 Tw
(sion as trustee. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Each Non-Compact Tribe) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(2) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( is entitled to) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.63 Tw
(receive a distribution of $1.1 million per year from the Reve-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.36 Tw
(nue Fund, unless the funds therein are insufficient, in which) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.41 Tw
(case the available funds are distributed in equal shares among) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.5 Tw
(the Non-Compact Tribes. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.5 Tw
(4.3.2.1\(a\). The Commission) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.77 Tw
(has interpreted the 1999 Compacts as providing that the non-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.44 Tw
(refundable, one-time pre-payment fee may be used as a credit) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.9 Tw
(toward annual license fees, and that no annual fees would be) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(required for the first 350 licenses issued to a tribe. ) Tj
12 -26.5 Td
.03 Tw
(Pursuant to the 1999 Compacts, the Legislature also created) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
2.1 Tw
(the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund \() Tj
(Distribution) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.04 Tw
(Fund\). Cal. Gov't Code ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
3.04 Tw
(12012.85. The 1999 Compacts) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.11 Tw
(direct each gaming tribe to contribute to the Distribution Fund) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.36 Tw
(a portion of its revenues calculated according to the number) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.81 Tw
(of gaming devices operated and the ) Tj
(net wins) Tj
( of those) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.95 Tw
(devices. 1999 Compacts ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.95 Tw
(5.1\(a\). The Legislature may then) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.06 Tw
(appropriate funds from the Distribution Fund to make up for) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.68 Tw
(shortfalls that may occur in the . . . Revenue . . . Fund. This) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.08 Tw
(shall be the priority use of moneys in the . . . Distribution) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(Fund. Cal. Gov't Code ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(12012.85\(d\). ) Tj
12 -26.4 Td
1.45 Tw
(In 2002, the Commission notified Colusa and other Com-) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
1.6 Tw
(pact Tribes that it would conduct a round of gaming device) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26.1 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.25 Tw
(2) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(For purposes of revenue sharing, the 1999 Compacts define a Compact) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
2.03 Tw
(Tribe as a tribe having a compact with the State authorizing Class III) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.32 Tw
(Gaming; Non-Compact Tribes are defined as federally recognized tribes) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.95 Tw
(that are operating fewer than 350 gaming devices, whether or not such a) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(tribe has a compact with the State. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -432.85 m 300 -432.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10166) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
4225
endobj
21 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 22 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 6 6
25 0 obj
<<
/Length 26 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.3 Tw
0 Tc
(license draws that September. Prior to the draw, Colusa was) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
3 Tw
(operating its threshold number of 523 gaming devices for) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.4 Tw
(which it did not need licenses. Colusa notified the Commis-) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
0 Tw
(sion of its intent to draw 250 licenses and tendered a $312,500) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
.28 Tw
(check as its non-refundable one-time pre-payment fee. Colusa) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
.43 Tw
(was placed in the third priority tier and received 250 licenses.) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
2.2 Tw
(In November 2003, the Commission notified Colusa that it) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
2.46 Tw
(would conduct another round of draws in December 2003.) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
0 Tw
(Colusa requested 377 licenses and submitted a pre-payment of) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
2 Tw
($471,250. Colusa was assigned to the fourth priority tier, a) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.04 Tw
(classification that Colusa challenges in this litigation. Colusa) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.6 Tw
(alleges that it was assigned to the fourth tier because it had) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.81 Tw
(previously drawn some licenses in the third tier, even though) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
2.71 Tw
(the number of gaming devices it operated after the earlier) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
0 Tw
(drawing should have continued to place it in the third tier. The) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.07 Tw
(December drawing was held with Colusa in the fourth tier and) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
2.46 Tw
(it received no licenses. The Commission refunded the pre-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.41 Tw
(payment for those requested licenses in full. In October 2004,) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
2.95 Tw
(the Commission conducted a third draw. Colusa advanced) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.33 Tw
(fees for 341 licenses and was again placed in the fourth prior-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.11 Tw
(ity tier. It received only 73 licenses. Colusa anticipates receiv-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.55 Tw
(ing a refund of the pre-payment on the licenses that it did not) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(receive in the draw. ) Tj
12 -27.4 Td
6.5 Tw
(Immediately after the December 2003 draw, Colusa) Tj
-12 -13.8 Td
1.66 Tw
(requested that the Governor meet and confer with the Tribe) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.36 Tw
(with regard to \(1\) Colusa's assignment to the fourth priority) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.7 Tw
(tier in the December 2003 draw; \(2\) the Commission's deter-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.58 Tw
(mination of the statewide aggregate number of licenses avail-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.6 Tw
(able to all tribes for issuance under the 1999 Compacts; \(3\)) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.55 Tw
(the Commission's role and authority in the draw process; and) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.53 Tw
(\(4\) the Commission's retention of the $312,500 tendered by) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
.93 Tw
(the Tribe in connection with its draw of 250 licenses in Sep-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
2.41 Tw
(tember 2002. After an unsuccessful meeting, the State for-) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
5.61 Tw
(mally rejected each of Colusa's positions. Colusa then) Tj
0 -13.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(initiated this litigation. ) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10167) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
26 0 obj
3518
endobj
24 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 25 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 7 7
28 0 obj
<<
/Length 29 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -8.4 Td
1.28 Tw
0 Tc
(In its complaint, Colusa asserts that the State, through the) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
2.87 Tw
(actions of the Commission, breached the Compact by: \(1\)) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.7 Tw
(excluding Colusa from the third priority tier in the December) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.32 Tw
(2003 and October 2004 draws; \(2\) unilaterally determining) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.75 Tw
(the aggregate number of licenses authorized by the Compact;) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.1 Tw
(\(3\) refusing to refund Colusa's non-refundable one-time pre-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.66 Tw
(payment fee in conjunction with the licenses Colusa obtained) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1 Tw
(in September 2002 and October 2004; \(4\) conducting rounds) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.07 Tw
(of draws of licenses without authority; and \(5\) failing to nego-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.14 Tw
(tiate in good faith. The State filed a motion for judgment on) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.5 Tw
(the pleadings, seeking to dismiss Colusa's first, second, third,) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.92 Tw
(and fourth claims for failure to join necessary and indispens-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.87 Tw
(able parties and its fifth claim for failure to exhaust non-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
4.75 Tw
(judicial remedies.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(3) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The district court granted the State's) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.47 Tw
(motion to dismiss and entered judgment in its favor. Colusa) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(appeals. ) Tj
12 -26.4 Td
2.18 Tw
(While Colusa's appeal was pending, the State negotiated) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
.61 Tw
(and executed amendments to the 1999 Compacts individually) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.44 Tw
(with at least five Indian tribes, not including Colusa.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(4) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( These) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26.1 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.62 Tw
(3) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Colusa lists its fifth cause of actionfailure to negotiate in good faith) Tj
-10 -11.3 Td
.76 Tw
(among its grounds for appeal. It does not, however, advance any argu-) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.88 Tw
(ment in support of reversing the district court's judgment with respect to) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.58 Tw
(that claim. Accordingly, we deem the claim abandoned. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Fed. R. App.) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.83 Tw
(P. 28\(a\)\(9\)\(A\); ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Acosta-Huerta v. Estelle) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 7 F.3d 139, 144 \(9th Cir. 1992\)) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.23 Tw
(\() Tj
(Issues raised in a brief which are not supported by argument are deemed) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
3.11 Tw
(abandoned.) Tj
(\) \(quoting ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Leer v. Murphy) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 844 F.2d 628, 634 \(9th Cir.) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(1988\)\). We therefore affirm the district court's dismissal of that claim. ) Tj
10 -14 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.4 Tw
(4) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Amendment to the Tribal-State Compact Between the State of Califor-) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
2.65 Tw
(nia and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians \(Aug. 8, 2006\);) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.88 Tw
(Amendment to the Tribal-State Compact Between the State of California) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.89 Tw
(and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians \(Aug. 29, 2006\); Amendment) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
2.83 Tw
(to the Tribal-State Compact Between the State of California and the) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.52 Tw
(Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians \(Aug. 28, 2006\); Amendment) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.68 Tw
(to the Tribal-State Compact Between the State of California and the Syc-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.33 Tw
(uan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation \(Aug. 30, 2006\); Amendment to the) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.28 Tw
(Tribal-State Compact Between the State of California and the San Manuel) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.07 Tw
(Band of Serrano Mission Indians of the San Manuel Reservation \(Aug. 28,) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.76 Tw
(2006\); ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see also) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( Indian Gaming, 72 Fed. Reg. 71,939-0271,939-04 \(Dec.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -272.75 m 300 -272.75 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10168) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
29 0 obj
4591
endobj
27 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 28 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 8 8
32 0 obj
<<
/Length 33 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.73 Tw
0 Tc
(amended compacts, which became effective between Decem-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.95 Tw
(ber 2007 and January 2008 \() Tj
(2007 Amended Compacts) Tj
(\),) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.06 Tw
(provide for the issuance of up to 22,500 additional gaming) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
-.48 Tw
(device licenses outside the limits established by the 1999 Com-) Tj
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.5 Td
6.71 Tw
(pacts.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(5) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(2007 Amended Compacts ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
6.71 Tw
(II.B \(amended) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.66 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.66 Tw
(4.3.1\(a\)\). In addition, four of the five 2007 Amended Com-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1 Tw
(pacts provide that, if a shortfall occurs in the Revenue Fund,) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.07 Tw
(the State Gaming Agency shall direct a portion of the reve-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1 Tw
(nue contribution) Tj
( made by each of the 2007 Compact Tribes) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.5 Tw
(to increase the revenue contribution to the [Revenue Fund]) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.33 Tw
(in an amount sufficient to ensure the [Revenue Fund] has suf-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
3 Tw
(ficient resources for each eligible recipient Indian tribe to) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
3.66 Tw
(receive quarterly payments pursuant to Government Code) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
4.93 Tw
(Section 12012.90.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(E.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, Amendment to the Tribal-State) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.08 Tw
(Compact Between the State of California and the Morongo) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.58 Tw
(Band of Mission Indians ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.58 Tw
(II.B ) Tj
(\(Aug. 29, 2006\) \(amended) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.23 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.23 Tw
(4.3.1.\() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(l) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(\)\), ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(available at) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/compacts.asp) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.25 Tw
(\(last visited July 31, 2008\). The aggregate revenue contribu-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.57 Tw
(tion made by these four tribes, which is therefore available to) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.25 Tw
(fill any shortfall in the Revenue Fund, exceeds $140 million) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
4.2 Tw
(per year. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(2007 Amended Compacts ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
4.2 Tw
(II.B \(amended) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.2 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(4.3.1\(b\)\(i\)\). ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -26.5 Td
.15 Tw
(19, 2007\) \(notices\); Indian Gaming, 73 Fed. Reg. 3,480-01 \(Jan. 18, 2008\)) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
1.15 Tw
(\(notice\); ) Tj
(California Gambling Control Commission, Tribal-State Gaming) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
4.06 Tw
(Compacts, http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/compacts.asp) Tj
( \(last visited July 31,) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
1.92 Tw
(2008\). We take judicial notice of these amended compacts pursuant to) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
.96 Tw
(Federal Rule of Evidence 201, which ) Tj
(permits us to `take judicial notice) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
1.69 Tw
(of the records of state [entities] and other undisputed matters of public) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
2.34 Tw
(record,' [including] executed Compact[s] . . . not in the district court) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
1.33 Tw
(record. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Wilbur v. Locke) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 423 F.3d 1101, 1112 \(9th Cir. 2005\) \(quoting) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -11.4 Td
1.15 Tw
(Disabled Rights Action Comm. v. Las Vegas Events, Inc.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 375 F.3d 861,) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
.21 Tw
(866 n.1 \(9th Cir. 2004\)\). We note and overrule the State's objection to our) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
1 Tw
(consideration of these materials. ) Tj
10 -14.2 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.26 Tw
(5) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The 2007 Amended Compacts allow the amending tribes to continue) Tj
-10 -11.4 Td
.88 Tw
(operating machines pursuant to licenses previously issued under the pool) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
.18 Tw
(provision as well as machines which were operated on September 1, 1999.) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
3.72 Tw
(The pool provision licenses remain in force even though the 2007) Tj
0 -11.4 Td
1 Tw
(Amended Compacts repeal the pool provision itself. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -303.75 m 300 -303.75 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10169) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
33 0 obj
4758
endobj
31 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 32 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 9 9
35 0 obj
<<
/Length 36 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
113.328 -8.4 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(DISCUSSION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-101.328 -26.6 Td
1.21 Tw
(In addressing the State's Rule 19 motion to dismiss Colu-) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
2.6 Tw
(sa's claims for failure to join required parties, ) Tj
(the proper) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.25 Tw
(approach is first to decide whether the tribes are . . . `[re-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
3.25 Tw
(quired]' parties who should normally be joined under the) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.03 Tw
(standards of Rule 19\(a\).) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing, Inc. v. Hull) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.96 Tw
(305 F.3d 1015, 1022 \(9th Cir. 2002\).) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(6) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( If, as the district court) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.48 Tw
(concluded in this case, the tribes are required parties, ) Tj
(the) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.25 Tw
(court must determine whether, in equity and good conscience,) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
4.33 Tw
(the action should proceed among the existing parties or) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.36 Tw
(should be dismissed.) Tj
() Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(7) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Fed. R. Civ. P. 19\(b\). On appeal, we) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.03 Tw
(review the district court's Rule 19 determinations for an abuse) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.7 Tw
(of discretion. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305 F.3d at 1022; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(cf.) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.17 Tw
(Republic of the Philippines v. Pimentel) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 128 S.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.17 Tw
(Ct. 2180, 2189) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.36 Tw
(\(2008\) \(declining to address the standard of review for Rule) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
(19\(b\) decisions\). To the extent that in its inquiry the district) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.41 Tw
(court ) Tj
(decided a question of law, we review that determina-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.2 Tw
(tion de novo.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305 F.3d at 1022) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
12 -26.6 Td
.92 Tw
(The issue that we find dispositive of all contested portions) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
.8 Tw
(of this appeal is whether the absent tribes are ) Tj
(required) Tj
( par-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.47 Tw
(ties to the adjudication of Colusa's first, second, third and) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.52 Tw
(fourth claims within the meaning of Rule 19\(a\). We conclude) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26.2 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.28 Tw
(6) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 has been amended) Tj
-10 -11.3 Td
1.69 Tw
(since the district court's dismissal of this action. The Rules Committee) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.21 Tw
(advised that the changes were ) Tj
(stylistic only,) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( Fed. R. Civ. P. 19 advi-) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.93 Tw
(sory comm. nn. \(2008\), and the Supreme Court has agreed, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see Republic) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.2 Tw
(of the Philippines v. Pimentel) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 128 S.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.2 Tw
(Ct. 2180, 2184 \(2008\). Two changes) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
2.14 Tw
(are relevant to this case. First, the word ) Tj
(required) Tj
( replaced the word) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
2.78 Tw
(necessary in subparagraph \(a\). Second, the word ) Tj
(indispensable) Tj
( is) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.42 Tw
(deleted from the current text of subparagraph \(b\). All quotations hereinaf-) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.78 Tw
(ter to materials predating the 2007 amendment are altered, with brackets,) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
1 Tw
(to reflect the current language of Rule 19. ) Tj
10 -14.1 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.22 Tw
(7) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The parties do not dispute that the absent tribes enjoy sovereign immu-) Tj
-10 -11.3 Td
.06 Tw
(nity. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 436 U.S. 49, 58 \(1978\). Accord-) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
1.29 Tw
(ingly, because they have not consented to suit, they cannot be joined in) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
1 Tw
(this action. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -327.95 m 300 -327.95 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10170) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
36 0 obj
4675
endobj
34 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 35 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 10 10
38 0 obj
<<
/Length 39 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.9 Tw
0 Tc
(that they are not, and that the district court abused its discre-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.27 Tw
(tion in finding that the absent tribes were required parties to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.12 Tw
(the disposition of these claims. We accordingly reverse the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.16 Tw
(district court's judgment with respect to those claims and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.57 Tw
(remand for further proceedings. Our conclusion that the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.85 Tw
(absent tribes are not required parties under Rule 19\(a\) makes) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.83 Tw
(inapplicable the provisions of Rule 19\(b\) governing the deci-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(sion whether to proceed with litigation when a required party) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.07 Tw
(cannot be joined; we therefore do not address the district) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(court's determination of that issue.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(8) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.1 Td
.74 Tw
([1]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The absent tribes are ) Tj
(required) Tj
( parties to this action if) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(they ) Tj
(claim[) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.03 Tw
(] an ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(interest) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( relating to the subject of the action) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.47 Tw
(and [are] so situated that disposing of the action in [their]) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.27 Tw
(absence may: \(i\) as a practical matter impair or impede [their]) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.8 Tw
(ability to ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(protect the interest) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(; or \(ii\) leave an existing party) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.36 Tw
(subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.93 Tw
(otherwise inconsistent obligations ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(because of the interest) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(.) Tj
() Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.46 Tw
(Fed. R. Civ. P. 19\(a\)\(1\)\(B\) \(emphases added\).) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(9) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( A crucial) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(premise of mandatory joinder, then, is that the absent tribes) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.25 Tw
(possess an interest in the pending litigation that is ) Tj
(legally) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(protected. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah Indian Tribe v. Verity) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d 555, 558) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.08 Tw
(\(9th Cir. 1990\). We have developed few categorical rules) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(informing this inquiry. At one end of the spectrum, we have) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.33 Tw
(held that the interest at stake need not be ) Tj
(property in the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.3 Tw
(sense of the due process clause.) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.91 Tw
(F.3d at 1023. At the other end of the spectrum, we have rec-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.37 Tw
(ognized that the ) Tj
(interest must be more than a financial stake,) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -25.9 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
2.62 Tw
(8) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(For the same reason, our analysis is not affected by the Supreme) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
1.43 Tw
(Court's recent holding in ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Pimentel) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 128 S.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.43 Tw
(Ct. at 2190. In ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Pimentel) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, the) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.02 Tw
(Supreme Court reversed the decision of a panel of this court because it had) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.6 Tw
(not ) Tj
(giv[en] full effect to sovereign immunity) Tj
( in its Rule 19\(b\) calculus.) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -11.2 Td
1.65 Tw
(Id.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( Because in our case the absent tribes are not required parties under) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
2.34 Tw
(Rule 19\(a\), we are unaffected by the Rule 19\(b\) analysis set forth in) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(Pimentel) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(. ) Tj
10 -14 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.99 Tw
(9) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The State does not contend that, in the absence of the other Compact) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.25 Tw
(\(or Non-Compact\) Tribes, ) Tj
(the court cannot accord complete relief among) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(existing parties.) Tj
( Fed. R. Civ. P. 19\(a\)\(1\)\(A\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -374.15 m 300 -374.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10171) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
39 0 obj
4822
endobj
37 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 38 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 11 11
41 0 obj
<<
/Length 42 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.7 Tw
0 Tc
(and more than speculation about a future event.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.66 Tw
(F.2d at 558 \(citations omitted\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also ) Tj
(N. Alaska Envtl. Ctr.) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.03 Tw
(v. Hodel) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 803 F.2d 466, 468-69 \(9th Cir. 1986\) \(holding that) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.33 Tw
(miners who had submitted mining plans to National Park Ser-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.93 Tw
(vice were not necessary parties to an action to enjoin mining) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
3.75 Tw
(in parks until environmental impact statements were pre-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.74 Tw
(pared\). Within the wide boundaries set by these general prin-) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.1 Tw
(ciples, we have emphasized the ) Tj
(practical) Tj
( and ) Tj
(fact-specific) Tj
() Tj
0 -13.5 Td
.48 Tw
(nature of the inquiry. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 558; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also ) Tj
(Bakia) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.09 Tw
(v. County of Los Angeles) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 687 F.2d 299, 301 \(9th Cir. 1982\)) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.25 Tw
(\(per curiam\) \() Tj
(There is no precise formula for determining) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.5 Tw
(whether a particular nonparty should be joined under Rule) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.15 Tw
(19\(a\) . . . . The determination is heavily influenced by the) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
4.1 Tw
(facts and circumstances of each case.) Tj
(\). Accordingly, an) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
1.75 Tw
(interest that ) Tj
(arises from terms in bargained contracts) Tj
( may) Tj
0 -13.5 Td
2.1 Tw
(be protected, but we have required that such an interest be) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.37 Tw
(substantial. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305 F.3d at 1023. An) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.84 Tw
(interest in a fixed fund or limited resource that the court is) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.23 Tw
(asked to allocate may also be protected. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.63 Tw
(558-59. At the same time, an absent party has no legally pro-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.67 Tw
(tected interest at stake in a suit merely to enforce compliance) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.32 Tw
(with administrative procedures. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See N. Alaska) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 803 F.2d at) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.53 Tw
(469; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 559 \() Tj
(The absent tribes would not) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.14 Tw
(be prejudiced because all of the tribes have an equal interest) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.2 Tw
(in an administrative process that is lawful.) Tj
(\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -26.7 Td
(The Size of the License Pool ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26.6 Td
2.88 Tw
(Colusa challenges the Commission's computation of the) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
2.08 Tw
(statewide maximum number of licences that may be issued) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.95 Tw
(under the 1999 Compacts. The district court dismissed Colu-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
3.53 Tw
(sa's claim, concluding that the other Compact Tribes are) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.93 Tw
(required parties in the absence of which the action should be) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
0 Tw
(dismissed. Although we agree with the district court that some) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.04 Tw
(absent tribes may prefer that the State issue fewer licenses, we) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.91 Tw
(reverse its dismissal of Colusa's claim because the absent) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.3 Tw
(tribes' only interest relevant for Rule 19\(a\) purposes is free-) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10172) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
42 0 obj
4083
endobj
40 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 41 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 12 12
44 0 obj
<<
/Length 45 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.82 Tw
0 Tc
(dom from competition. We hold that this interest, without) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(more, is not ) Tj
(legally protected) Tj
( for Rule 19 purposes. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -25.5 Td
1.44 Tw
([2]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( It is important to identify clearly the Compact Tribes') Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
1.62 Tw
(interest at stake. Those Compact Tribes that currently enjoy) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.06 Tw
(a dominant position in the gaming industry will likely prefer) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
2.82 Tw
(to maintain a low statewide maximum number of licenses) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.77 Tw
(available under the 1999 Compacts. On the other hand, those) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.91 Tw
(who intend to expand their gaming operations and compete) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
5.16 Tw
(with the dominant gaming tribes will gladly accept an) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.85 Tw
(increase in the size of the license pool created by the 1999) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.34 Tw
(Compacts. Indeed, the State itself repeatedly characterizes the) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
3 Tw
(absent tribes' interest at stake as the preservation of their) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.83 Tw
(market share) Tj
( within California's gaming industry. Properly) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
3.1 Tw
(framed, then, the respective advantages that various tribes) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.67 Tw
(may enjoy under a more generous or restrictive interpretation) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.2 Tw
(of the pool provision are an economic incident of their market) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(positions under a common licensing regime. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -25.5 Td
1.88 Tw
([3]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The mere fact that the outcome of Colusa's litigation) Tj
-12 -12.9 Td
3.85 Tw
(may have some financial consequences for the non-party) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
1.7 Tw
(tribes is not sufficient to make those tribes required parties,) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
1.63 Tw
(however. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 558 \() Tj
([The] interest) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
.33 Tw
(must be more than a financial stake.) Tj
(\). The absent tribes must) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
1 Tw
(have a legally protected interest and, on this record, the only) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
2.75 Tw
(potential protection lies in the 1999 Compacts themselves.) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
3.14 Tw
(The interest could be protected if it actually ) Tj
(arises from) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
2.28 Tw
(terms in bargained contracts.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305) Tj
0 -12.9 Td
.72 Tw
(F.3d at 1023. We conclude that it does not.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(10) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The 1999 Com-) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -25.5 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.71 Tw
(10) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We do not decide the broader question whether avoiding competition) Tj
-10 -11 Td
.92 Tw
(ever qualifies as a legally protected interest under Rule 19\(a\) in the con-) Tj
0 -11 Td
1.46 Tw
(text of Indian gaming. We note, however, that the legislative history of) Tj
0 -11 Td
.83 Tw
(IGRA casts considerable doubt on a state's assertion of any such interest) Tj
0 -11 Td
.52 Tw
(in the context of Indian gaming; the Senate's Select Committee on Indian) Tj
0 -11 Td
.6 Tw
(Affairs reported its intent that the states not use IGRA's Class III gaming) Tj
0 -11 Td
2.18 Tw
(compact requirement as a protectionist measure, although that concern) Tj
0 -11 Td
.75 Tw
(was directed at the protection of non-tribal operators, not absent tribes as) Tj
0 -11 Td
1.76 Tw
(in this case. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(S. Rep. No. 100-446, at 13 \(1988\), ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(reprinted in) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( 1988) Tj
0 -11 Td
1 Tw
(U.S.C.C.A.N. 3071, 3083. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -379.05 m 300 -379.05 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10173) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
45 0 obj
4419
endobj
43 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 44 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 13 13
47 0 obj
<<
/Length 48 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.16 Tw
0 Tc
(pacts do not purport to establish, through the license pool pro-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.14 Tw
(vision or otherwise, an overarching limit on the number of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.04 Tw
(gaming licenses generally available in California. Rather, they) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.27 Tw
(place a limit only on the smaller universe of licenses that may) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.25 Tw
(be issued ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(under the 1999 Compacts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(11) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( This limit alone is) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.04 Tw
(insufficient to determine the competitive landscape of Califor-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.23 Tw
(nia's gaming industry, for it leaves the State at liberty to issue) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.52 Tw
(an unlimited number of licenses outside the pool created by) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.91 Tw
(the 1999 Compacts. Indeed, the State has recently negotiated) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.3 Tw
(amendments, now in effect, to the 1999 Compacts with sev-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.88 Tw
(eral tribes. These amendments provide for the issuance of up) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.4 Tw
(to 22,500 additional licenses outside the pool created by the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.3 Tw
(1999 Compacts. These actions reflect the reality that the 1999) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.47 Tw
(Compacts afford no express or implied protection against) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.3 Tw
(competition per se. The interest of some of the absent tribes) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.03 Tw
(in avoiding competition does not ) Tj
(arise[) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.03 Tw
(] from terms in bar-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.53 Tw
(gained contracts,) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, and is accordingly not ) Tj
(legally protect-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.44 Tw
(ed under the circumstances of this case. The absent 1999) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.52 Tw
(Compact tribes thus are not required parties for litigation of) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.18 Tw
(Colusa's claim seeking to raise the aggregate limit on licenses) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(under the 1999 Compacts. ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
.21 Tw
(In reaching this conclusion, we reject the State's contention) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.13 Tw
(that its licensing scheme is comparable to the system for the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.3 Tw
(allocation of limited resources at issue in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.33 Tw
(we held that absent tribes had a protected interest that made) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.14 Tw
(them necessary parties to a claim for amendment of a pre-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.81 Tw
(existing allocation of a finite resourcea particular year's) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(off-shore salmon harvestbecause an allocation to one tribe) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
6.05 Tw
(necessarily entailed the parallel deprivation of another.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
.9 Tw
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 556-57. The resource at issue was finite:) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(ocean fishing of salmon in excess of the total permitted har-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.08 Tw
(vest would jeopardize the survival of the species' population) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.75 Tw
(in the region's weakest runs. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 557. ) Tj
(In contrast, the gam-) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(11) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The 1999 Compacts establish a formula for a limit on the ) Tj
(number of) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
1.11 Tw
(machines that all Compact Tribes in the aggregate may license ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(pursuant) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(to this Section . . . .) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( 1999 Compacts ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1 Tw
(4.3.2.2\(a\)\(1\) \(emphasis added\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -455.35 m 300 -455.35 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10174) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
48 0 obj
4375
endobj
46 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 47 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 14 14
51 0 obj
<<
/Length 52 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
4.66 Tw
0 Tc
(ing licensing scheme at issue here rations a resource) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.22 Tw
(licenses for gaming devicesthat is, if not for purely eco-) Tj
0 -13 Td
.28 Tw
(nomic considerations, effectively unlimited. Thus, for the rea-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.64 Tw
(soning of ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( to be at all relevant to this case, the State) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.28 Tw
(would need to show that, despite not being ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(inherently) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( finite,) Tj
0 -13 Td
0 Tw
(the resource of licenses for gaming devices is rendered at least) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13 Td
.36 Tw
(legally) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( finite by operation of the terms of the 1999 Compacts.) Tj
0 -13 Td
.18 Tw
(As we have already explained, however, the statewide cap put) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.06 Tw
(in place by the 1999 Compacts does not, without more, con-) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.08 Tw
(strain the number of gaming licenses generally available in) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.66 Tw
(California. Thus, the absent tribes have no legally protected) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.47 Tw
(interest in the determination of the license pool that may be) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(issued under the 1999 Compacts. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -25.9 Td
.33 Tw
([4]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Finally, we also find it significant that, unlike the plain-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(tiff in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(American Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, Colusa does not seek to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.46 Tw
(invalidate compacts to which it is not a party; this litigation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(is not ) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(aimed) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at the other tribes and their gaming. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Grey-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.77 Tw
(hound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305 F.3d at 1026. On the contrary, Colusa) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.27 Tw
(seeks to enforce a provision of its own Compact which may) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.21 Tw
(affect other tribes only incidentally. Under the specific cir-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.88 Tw
(cumstances of this case, the Compact Tribes are not required) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.4 Tw
(parties to the adjudication of Colusa's challenge to the size of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(the 1999 Compact license pool.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(12) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -25.9 Td
(Colusa's Placement in Priority Tier IV) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
1 -26 Td
1.16 Tw
(Colusa next challenges its placement in the fourth priority) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.52 Tw
(tier since the December 2003 draw. The district court dis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.4 Tw
(missed Colusa's claim on the ground that the absent Compact) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(Tribes ) Tj
(would be deprived of th[eir gaming] licenses or the) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -25.8 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.72 Tw
(12) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We also are not persuaded by the State's unexplained contention that) Tj
-10 -11.1 Td
.9 Tw
(adjudication of Colusa's challenge to the Commission's determination of) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.23 Tw
(the statewide cap would expose the State to a significant risk of ) Tj
(inconsis-) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.86 Tw
(tent obligations) Tj
( within the meaning of Rule 19. Should different district) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.12 Tw
(courts reach inconsistent conclusions with respect to the size of the license) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
2.53 Tw
(pool created under the 1999 Compacts, such inconsistencies could be) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
1 Tw
(resolved in an appeal to this court. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -411.25 m 300 -411.25 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10175) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
52 0 obj
4216
endobj
50 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 51 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 15 15
54 0 obj
<<
/Length 55 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.75 Tw
0 Tc
(opportunity to obtain those licenses.) Tj
( This ruling was error,) Tj
0 -13 Td
.87 Tw
(for it misconstrues both the nature of the absent tribes' inter-) Tj
0 -13 Td
2 Tw
(est in the licenses that may be issued in the future and the) Tj
0 -13 Td
.24 Tw
(consequences of litigating Colusa's challenge to its placement) Tj
0 -13 Td
.23 Tw
(in the fourth tier. It is true that, if one assumes that the license) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.63 Tw
(pool is finite, an order to issue new licenses to Colusa may) Tj
0 -13 Td
.78 Tw
(render those licenses unavailable to the absent tribes, thereby) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.37 Tw
(depriving them of their ) Tj
(opportunity) Tj
( to obtain them. None-) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.14 Tw
(theless, we conclude that the absent tribes' interest in their) Tj
0 -13 Td
.08 Tw
(opportunity to obtain future licenses is insufficient to render) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(them ) Tj
(required) Tj
( parties for Rule 19\(a\) purposes. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
3.03 Tw
([5]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Once again, it is necessary carefully to identify the) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.43 Tw
(absent parties' interest at stake. To the extent that the ) Tj
(oppor-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.75 Tw
(tunity to obtain licenses means the entitlement to participate) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.84 Tw
(in future rounds of draws, the litigation of Colusa's tier) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.74 Tw
(assignment will not ) Tj
(as a practical matter impair or impede) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.2 Tw
(the [absent tribes'] ability to protect the interest.) Tj
( Fed. R. Civ.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.41 Tw
(P. 19\(a\)\(1\)\(B\)\(i\). The absent tribes remain free to enter future) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.12 Tw
(draws. The possible complaint of the absent tribes, however,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.86 Tw
(is that assignment of Colusa to a higher priority tier may) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.77 Tw
(dilute the probability that the absent tribes will obtain the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(licenses they apply for. But the absent tribes have no guaran-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.22 Tw
(tee against having to compete with any particular number of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.02 Tw
(tribes in their tier or a higher-priority tier. Nor can it be said) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.42 Tw
(that any particular degree of likelihood of receiving licenses) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.87 Tw
(arises from terms in bargained contracts) Tj
( and, more specifi-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.08 Tw
(cally, from the 1999 Compacts. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 305) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(F.3d at 1023. Under IGRA, entering into a compact with state) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.16 Tw
(authorities is, of course, a threshold requirement for Indian) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.58 Tw
(tribes wishing to develop Class III gaming operations. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(25) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.93 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.93 Tw
(2710\(d\)\(1\)\(C\). In that sense, if it were not for the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.28 Tw
(1999 Compacts, the absent tribes would have ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(no) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( likelihood of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.62 Tw
(ever obtaining any licenses. In our ) Tj
(practical) Tj
( and ) Tj
(fact-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.92 Tw
(specific Rule 19 inquiry, however, we require more than) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.91 Tw
(mere ) Tj
(but-for) Tj
( causation before recognizing a legally pro-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.26 Tw
(tected interest. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 558; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also Bakia) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 687) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(F.2d at 301. Here, in addition to the threshold requirement of) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10176) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
55 0 obj
4228
endobj
53 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 54 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 16 16
57 0 obj
<<
/Length 58 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.6 Tw
0 Tc
(a compact, a number of other factors determine the actual) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.7 Tw
(likelihood that any given tribe will receive any licenses. As) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.03 Tw
(the facts of this litigation demonstrate, crucial among these) Tj
0 -13 Td
.17 Tw
(factors is the past, present and future demand for new licenses) Tj
0 -13 Td
.54 Tw
(by other tribes placed in higher or equal priority tiers. A tribe) Tj
0 -13 Td
.16 Tw
(wishing to obtain additional licenses has absolutely no control) Tj
0 -13 Td
.5 Tw
(over the overall demand for new licenses, or over the number) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.27 Tw
(of tribes that may be placed in the same or a higher priority) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.63 Tw
(tier. Thus, the causal connection between the terms of the) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.25 Tw
(1999 Compacts and an absent tribe's likelihood of obtaining) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.41 Tw
(future licenses is attenuated indeed. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.13 Tw
(558 \() Tj
(speculation about a future event) Tj
( does not give rise to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.21 Tw
(a legally protected interest\). We therefore conclude that no) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.32 Tw
(particular degree of likelihood of obtaining licenses ) Tj
(arises) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.52 Tw
(from terms in bargained contracts,) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.16 Tw
(305 F.3d at 1023. As a consequence, the opportunity to obtain) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.41 Tw
(licenses does not qualify as a legally protected interest for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(Rule 19 purposes. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.4 Tw
(The interest of the absent tribes in Colusa's tier assignment) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.07 Tw
(is therefore quite different from the interest of the absent) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.58 Tw
(tribes in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(American Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. In that case, we) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.75 Tw
(emphasized that the gaming compacts between Arizona and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.47 Tw
(the Indian tribes, which were the subject of that litigation,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.92 Tw
(provide[d] for automatic renewal if neither party gives the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.21 Tw
(requisite notice of termination. [That] provision [was] an inte-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(gral part of the existing compacts, and was part of the bargain) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
0 Tw
(that the tribes entered with the State.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Am. Greyhound Racing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.14 Tw
(305 F.3d at 1023. We reversed the district court's injunction) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.85 Tw
(because it modified the compacts of the absent tribes and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3 Tw
(stripped those tribes of the very object of their bargain) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(automatic renewal unless the parties affirmatively terminated) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.92 Tw
(the compacts. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Here, Colusa's tier claim does not negate) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.12 Tw
(any absent tribe's right to its place in any tier, or its right to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.96 Tw
(participate in the manner guaranteed by the Compacts. Colu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.4 Tw
(sa's claim at most increases the competition for licenses to be) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.13 Tw
(drawn but, as we have explained, the 1999 Compacts do not) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.62 Tw
(guarantee freedom from competition, nor do they grant an) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10177) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
58 0 obj
4015
endobj
56 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 57 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 17 17
60 0 obj
<<
/Length 61 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.33 Tw
0 Tc
(entitlement to draw any specific license or number of licenses) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.45 Tw
(or even a predetermined place in line that may entail a partic-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
3.08 Tw
(ular likelihood of obtaining new licenses. Thus, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(American) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
3.61 Tw
(Greyhound Racing ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(does not control, because litigation of) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.81 Tw
(Colusa's claim for placement in a higher tier cannot impair) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.75 Tw
(any Compact rights that were the object of the bargain of the) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.2 Tw
(absent tribes. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.6 Td
3.25 Tw
([6]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Different considerations apply to the interest of the) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
1.48 Tw
(absent tribes in the licenses that they have already received.) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.7 Tw
(We do not question that the Compact Tribes which requested) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.41 Tw
(and obtained licenses in the December 2003 and subsequent) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.26 Tw
(draws by placing ahead of Colusa have a legally protected) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.27 Tw
(interest in those licenses. In order for the absent tribes to be) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.75 Tw
(required) Tj
( parties under Rule 19, however, the State must) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.36 Tw
(also show that their ability to protect their interest ) Tj
(may .) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.36 Tw
(.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.36 Tw
(.) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
0 Tw
(as a practical matter [be] impair[ed]) Tj
( by the litigation of Colu-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.6 Tw
(sa's claim to a higher tier placement. Fed. R. Civ. P. 19\(a\)\(1\)) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.03 Tw
(\(B\)\(i\). To the extent that Colusa seeks prospective relief in the) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.22 Tw
(form of a declaration that may place it in the third priority tier) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.85 Tw
(in future draws, such relief, if granted, would not prejudice) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.33 Tw
(the absent tribes' legally protected interest in their ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(existing) Tj
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
1.04 Tw
(licenses.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(13) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( It was therefore an abuse of discretion for the dis-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.33 Tw
(trict court to prohibit Colusa from litigating the legality of the) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
4.47 Tw
(Commission's interpretation of the tier system. Like the) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
1.44 Tw
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( court, however, we emphasize that ) Tj
(the scope of the) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.36 Tw
(relief available [to Colusa] .) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.36 Tw
(.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.36 Tw
(. is narrow.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.82 Tw
(at 559. Accordingly, to the extent Colusa seeks injunctive) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.55 Tw
(relief requiring the Commission to restore Colusa to the posi-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.66 Tw
(tion it would have occupied under its claimed interpretation) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.57 Tw
(of the Compact by issuing new licenses, such relief may be) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26.2 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
2.08 Tw
(13) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The State's contention that prospective relief is inapposite because) Tj
-10 -11.3 Td
1.11 Tw
(Colusa's tier placement would be determined by a formula not available) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
2.04 Tw
(to the other Compact Tribes is unavailing. As we explained, the 1999) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
.38 Tw
(Compacts do not create a legally protected interest in either freedom from) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
1.36 Tw
(competition, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see supra) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( p. 10172-73, or a specific place in line in future) Tj
0 -11.3 Td
1 Tw
(draws, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see supra) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( p. 10177-78. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -421.15 m 300 -421.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10178) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
61 0 obj
4444
endobj
59 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 60 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 18 18
63 0 obj
<<
/Length 64 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(granted only insofar as it does not interfere with the validity) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.18 Tw
(or distribution of the licenses already assigned to the other) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.2 Tw
(Compact Tribes.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(14) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -27.1 Td
(Colusa's Pre-payment Fees) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
1 -27.1 Td
1.28 Tw
(In its next claim, Colusa seeks restitution of the $403,750) Tj
-12 -13.7 Td
2.55 Tw
(it tendered to the Commission as pre-payment for the 323) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.56 Tw
(licenses it has obtained in the draws thus far. The Commis-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
3.2 Tw
(sion, as trustee of the Revenue Fund, is holding the pre-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.82 Tw
(payment as a credit against future annual fees. Colusa argues) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.83 Tw
(that the pre-payment should be refunded because Colusa will) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.63 Tw
(not owe any annual fees until it draws at least 350 licenses) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.39 Tw
(an illusory prospect so long as the tribe is assigned to the) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.45 Tw
(fourth priority tier.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(15) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The district court dismissed the claim) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.78 Tw
(because Colusa's non-refundable pre-payment is deposited in) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.5 Tw
(the Revenue Fund and, ) Tj
(to the extent that there is insufficient) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.33 Tw
(money to pay each Non-Compact Tribe $1.1 million per year,) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.53 Tw
(an award to plaintiff will lessen the amount of money distrib-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.9 Tw
(uted to each other tribe.) Tj
( Thus the district court held that the) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
4.2 Tw
(claim could not be litigated in the absence of the non-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.2 Tw
(Compact tribes eligible for distributions from the Fund. ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -27 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.66 Tw
(14) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We reject the State's argument that, if Colusa prevailed on its first) Tj
-10 -11.6 Td
.13 Tw
(claim that it was entitled to a higher tier placement, the entire license draw) Tj
0 -11.6 Td
.7 Tw
(process would have to be retroactively undone. Colusa does not seek this) Tj
0 -11.6 Td
.83 Tw
(remedy and we see no reason why a court of equity would be compelled) Tj
0 -11.6 Td
1 Tw
(to grant it. ) Tj
10 -16.7 Td
2.28 Tw
(We also reject the State's contention that ) Tj
(the other 1999 Compact) Tj
-10 -11.5 Td
.9 Tw
(tribes, which have been placed in tiers based on the Commission's inter-) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
.58 Tw
(pretation of the tier process, would nevertheless have suffered prejudice.) Tj
() Tj
0 -11.5 Td
.02 Tw
(The licenses that have already been issued comprise the absent tribes' only) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
.6 Tw
(legally protected interest at stake. As we have made clear, however, none) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1 Tw
(of those licenses may be invalidated at the remedial stage. ) Tj
10 -14.4 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.51 Tw
(15) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The Tribe drew 250 licenses in September 2002, and another 73 in) Tj
-10 -11.5 Td
.32 Tw
(October 2004, for a total of 323 licenses. Colusa represents that it will not) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1.42 Tw
(be permitted to draw any more licenses so long as it remains in a low-) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1 Tw
(priority tier. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -307.75 m 300 -307.75 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10179) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
64 0 obj
4003
endobj
62 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 63 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 19 19
66 0 obj
<<
/Length 67 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -8.4 Td
2.03 Tw
0 Tc
([7]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We need not decide whether the district court's Rule) Tj
-12 -12.4 Td
4.83 Tw
(19\(a\) determination was correct. The State's intervening) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
.16 Tw
(amendment and ratification of its 1999 Compacts with several) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
1.53 Tw
(gaming tribes, which is memorialized in the 2007 Amended) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
.21 Tw
(Compacts, have significantly altered the financing of the Rev-) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
.03 Tw
(enue Fund. Four of the 2007 Amended Compacts that are now) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
1.2 Tw
(in effect contain the following provision:) Tj
22 -24.7 Td
.03 Tw
(If it is determined that there is an insufficient amount) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
1.75 Tw
(in the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
1.5 Tw
(in a fiscal year to distribute the quarterly payments) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
1.93 Tw
(pursuant to Government Code Section 12012.90 to) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
2.85 Tw
(each eligible recipient Indian tribe, then the State) Tj
0 -12.4 Td
.41 Tw
(Gaming Agency shall direct a portion of the revenue) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
3.55 Tw
(contribution in Section 4.3.1\(b\)\(i\) to increase the) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1 Tw
(revenue contribution to the Indian Gaming Revenue) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1.2 Tw
(Sharing Trust Fund in Section 4.3.2.2 in an amount) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
4.33 Tw
(sufficient to ensure the Indian Gaming Revenue) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.71 Tw
(Sharing Trust Fund has sufficient resources for each) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
3.33 Tw
(eligible recipient Indian tribe to receive quarterly) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
4.6 Tw
(payments pursuant to Government Code Section) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1.2 Tw
(12012.90. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-22 -24.7 Td
2.28 Tw
(E.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, Amendment to the Tribal-State Compact Between the) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.47 Tw
(State of California and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
2.38 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.38 Tw
(II.B \(Aug. 29, 2006\), \(amended ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.38 Tw
(4.3.1\() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(l) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(\)\). The ) Tj
(revenue) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.14 Tw
(contribution specified in amended section 4.3.1\(b\)\(i\) of these) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1 Tw
(four 2007 Amended Compacts, in turn, guarantees an annual) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1.5 Tw
(aggregate inflow to the State in excess of $140 million. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -12.5 Td
5.14 Tw
(2007 Amended Compacts ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
5.14 Tw
(II.B \(amended ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
5.14 Tw
(4.3.1\(b\)\(i\)\).) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.28 Tw
(Should a shortfall develop in the Revenue Fund, the Commis-) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1.66 Tw
(sion ) Tj
(shall) Tj
( direct a sufficient portion of this amount to the) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
2.96 Tw
(Revenue Fund to make up for the shortfall. The potential) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.4 Tw
(backfill of more than $140 million per year guaranteed by the) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
1.07 Tw
(2007 Amended Compacts appears as a practical matter to be) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.45 Tw
(more than sufficient to make up for any shortfall in the Reve-) Tj
0 -12.5 Td
.22 Tw
(nue Fund.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(16) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We therefore conclude that the refund of Colusa's) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -24.7 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
0 Tw
(16) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(As of September 20, 2007, 71 Indian tribes were eligible to receive the) Tj
-10 -10.6 Td
.03 Tw
($1.1-million annual distribution from the Revenue Fund. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, Califor-) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -467.85 m 300 -467.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10180) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
67 0 obj
4183
endobj
65 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 66 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 20 20
70 0 obj
<<
/Length 71 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.77 Tw
0 Tc
($403,750 pre-payment fee, if appropriate under the Compact,) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.33 Tw
(will not ) Tj
(as a practical matter impair or impede [the Non-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.91 Tw
(Compact Tribes'] ability to protect [their] interest) Tj
( in receiv-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.7 Tw
(ing their annual $1.1-million distribution as required by Cali-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.2 Tw
(fornia state law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 19\(a\)\(1\)\(B\)\(i\).) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(17) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
12 -27.1 Td
3.53 Tw
(In the alternative, the State contends that the Compact) Tj
-12 -13.7 Td
.82 Tw
(Tribes are also required parties to the pre-payment fee claim.) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.22 Tw
(It argues that Colusa's success in obtaining its refund would) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1 Tw
(impair the Compact Tribes' ability to protect their interest in) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.32 Tw
(the 1999 Compact's interpretation and the fulfillment of its) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
3.28 Tw
(terms by all 1999 Compact tribes.) Tj
( The State's argument) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.12 Tw
(sweeps much too broadly. Nothing in the Compact establishes) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.91 Tw
(any obligation towards the other Compact Tribes insofar as) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
.11 Tw
(the payment or refundability of Colusa's advance fees into the) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
4.3 Tw
(Revenue Fund are concerned.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(18) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( With respect to the pre-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.6 Tw
(payment provision, the 1999 Compacts are quintessentially) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.1 Tw
(bilateral. Accordingly, the Compact Tribes' relevant Rule 19) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1 Tw
(interest must arise, if at all, from the bare fact that the Com-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.42 Tw
(pact Tribes are simultaneously parties to identical ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(bilateral) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.7 Td
1.83 Tw
(compacts with the State. We have never held that the mere) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
2.56 Tw
(coincidence of parallel and independent contractual obliga-) Tj
0 -13.7 Td
1.88 Tw
(tions vis-a-vis a common party requires joinder of all simi-) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -26.9 Td
.86 Tw
(nia Gambling Control Commission, Revenue Sharing Trust Fund Recipi-) Tj
0 -11.6 Td
10.65 Tw
(ents \(Sept. 20, 2007\), ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(available at) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/) Tj
0 -11.6 Td
4.63 Tw
(rstfi/2008/DistribFundReport020503%20% 20-%2 003312008.pdf \(last) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1 Tw
(visited July 31, 2008\). ) Tj
10 -14.5 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.76 Tw
(17) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We reject the State's argument that ) Tj
(actual implementation \(which is) Tj
-10 -11.5 Td
.72 Tw
(not described in [the 2007 Compacts]\) could result in delayed reimburse-) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
.92 Tw
(ment to the Non-Compact Tribes. Rule 19 requires ) Tj
(more than specula-) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1 Tw
(tion about a future event.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 558 \(citations omitted\). ) Tj
10 -14.4 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.99 Tw
(18) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(It is true that, under the Compact, Colusa ) Tj
(agree[d]) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
( with all other) Tj
-10 -11.5 Td
2.52 Tw
(Compact Tribes ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(. . . that each Non-Compact Tribe in the State shall) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1.69 Tw
(receive the sum of $1.1 million per year.) Tj
( 1999 Compacts, ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.69 Tw
(4.3.2.1\(a\)) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
2.81 Tw
(\(emphasis added\). No reciprocal obligation to ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(contribute) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( any specific) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
.03 Tw
(amount or forgo otherwise legitimate claims to the pre-payment fees, how-) Tj
0 -11.5 Td
1 Tw
(ever, arises from this joint commitment. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -321.65 m 300 -321.65 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10181) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
71 0 obj
4440
endobj
69 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 70 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 21 21
73 0 obj
<<
/Length 74 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.03 Tw
0 Tc
(larly situated parties. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf. ) Tj
(Dawavendewa v. Salt River Project) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.36 Tw
(Agric. Improvement & Power Dist.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 276 F.3d 1150, 1157 \(9th) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.48 Tw
(Cir. 2002\) \() Tj
([A] ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(party to a contract) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( is necessary, and if not) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.18 Tw
(susceptible to joinder, indispensable to litigation seeking to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.45 Tw
(decimate that contract.) Tj
(\) \(emphasis added\). The mutuality-of-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.77 Tw
(party requirement of res judicata and defensive collateral) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.41 Tw
(estoppel ensures that the similarly situated absent tribes will) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(not be prejudiced if and when they decide to challenge the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.71 Tw
(Commission's interpretation of the refund provision of the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.2 Tw
(1999 Compacts.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(19) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( On the facts of this case, we decline the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(State's invitation to extend the scope of mandatory joinder. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.1 Td
2 Tw
([8]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Finally, we reject the State's argument that failure to) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
.7 Tw
(join the Compact Tribes may expose the State to inconsistent) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(obligations. As the First Circuit has cogently explained, ) Tj
22 -26.1 Td
1.25 Tw
([i]nconsistent obligations) Tj
( are not . . . the same as) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
5.07 Tw
(inconsistent adjudications or results. Inconsistent) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.32 Tw
(obligations occur when a party is unable to comply) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.45 Tw
(with one court's order without breaching another) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.16 Tw
(court's order concerning the same incident. Inconsis-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.42 Tw
(tent adjudications or results, by contrast, occur when) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.95 Tw
(a defendant successfully defends a claim in one) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.96 Tw
(forum, yet loses on another claim arising from the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(same incident in another forum. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-22 -26.2 Td
1.09 Tw
(Delgado v. Plaza Las Americas, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 139 F.3d 1, 3 \(1st Cir.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.25 Tw
(1998\) \(per curiam\) \(footnote and citations omitted\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
2.28 Tw
(4 James Wm. Moore et al., Moore's Federal Practice-Civil) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.94 Tw
(19) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We also note that the State's contention that Colusa's success would) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
2.05 Tw
(impair ) Tj
(the fulfillment of [the 1999 Compacts'] terms by all Compact) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.27 Tw
(tribes is vitiated by its circular reasoning. If Colusa succeeds in its claim,) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.72 Tw
(it will obtain relief that will, by definition, ) Tj
(fulfill) Tj
( the pre-payment term) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.1 Tw
(of the Compact. In other words, the only ) Tj
(fulfillment) Tj
( that Colusa's claim,) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.53 Tw
(if successful, would impair is that of the ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Commission) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
('s current interpreta-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.2 Tw
(tion of the provision. The Compact Tribes, however, have no ) Tj
(legally pro-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
4.37 Tw
(tected interest in the ) Tj
(fulfillment) Tj
( of the ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Commission) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
('s particular) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(interpretation of the Compact. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -388.15 m 300 -388.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10182) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
74 0 obj
4231
endobj
72 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 73 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 22 22
76 0 obj
<<
/Length 77 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.62 Tw
0 Tc
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.62 Tw
(19.03[4][d] \(2008\). We adopt the approach endorsed by the) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.57 Tw
(First Circuit. Accordingly, the possibility that the State may) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.58 Tw
(have to refund Colusa's pre-payment fees while adhering to) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.3 Tw
(a different interpretation of the Compact in its dealings with) Tj
0 -13 Td
1 Tw
(some other tribes does not, without more, rise to the level of) Tj
0 -13 Td
.61 Tw
(creating a ) Tj
(substantial risk) Tj
( of incurring ) Tj
(inconsistent obliga-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(tions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 19\(a\)\(1\)\(B\)\(ii\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -26 Td
4.15 Tw
(The Commission's Authority to Conduct Rounds of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(Draws) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
1 -26 Td
1.37 Tw
(Colusa finally argues that the Commission lacks authority) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.08 Tw
(under the compact unilaterally to conduct draws of gaming) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.58 Tw
(device licenses. As relief, Colusa requests a declaration that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.91 Tw
(the Commission ) Tj
(has no authority under the Compact unilat-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.25 Tw
(erally to administer the system established under the Compact) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.72 Tw
(for the issuance of Gaming device licenses, but only to do so) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.46 Tw
(in consultation with the Tribe.) Tj
( The district court concluded) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.26 Tw
(that, if Colusa ) Tj
(prevailed, the relief would deprive absent par-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(ties of their legal entitlements to the licenses awarded pursu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.03 Tw
(ant to an invalid process.) Tj
( We reverse the district court's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(determination because it is contrary to our decision in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(.) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
3.43 Tw
([9]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, we held that the absent tribes were not) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.33 Tw
(required parties to the adjudication of the plaintiff tribe's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
6.66 Tw
(procedural claims) Tj
(its claim that the harvest quotas) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.85 Tw
(imposed by the Secretary of Commerce ) Tj
(were the product of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
6.26 Tw
(commitments made outside the administrative process.) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
1.78 Tw
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 910 F.2d at 557 \(internal quotation marks omitted\).) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(We reasoned that ) Tj
([t]he absent tribes would not be prejudiced) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(because all of the tribes have an equal interest in an adminis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(trative process that is lawful.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 559. In so holding, we) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.76 Tw
(also made clear that Rule 19 required ) Tj
(the scope of the relief) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.47 Tw
(available to the Makah on their procedural claims [to be] nar-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
0 Tw
(row and limited to prospective relief. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We find this reason-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
6.28 Tw
(ing dispositive in this case as well. Much like their) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.52 Tw
(counterparts in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, the absent tribes ) Tj
(have an equal inter-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.77 Tw
(est in an administrative process that is lawful,) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(that is,) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10183) Tj
-198.2582 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
77 0 obj
4107
endobj
75 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 76 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 23 23
79 0 obj
<<
/Length 80 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.28 Tw
0 Tc
(that the Commission not conduct the draws of licenses ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(ultra) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.37 Tw
(vires) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. Moreover, as we have already made clear) Tj
(, Rule 19 nec-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.74 Tw
(essarily confines the relief that may be granted on Colusa's) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
0 Tw
(claims to remedies that do not invalidate the licenses that have) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.03 Tw
(already been issued to the absent Compact Tribes. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Makah) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.57 Tw
(910 F.2d at 559. Thus, we reverse the district court's dis-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.28 Tw
(missal of Colusa's fourth claim, albeit with the proviso that,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.7 Tw
(were Colusa to prevail on the merits, no existing license may) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(be invalidated at the remedial stage.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(20) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
109.332 -26.2 Td
(CONCLUSION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-97.332 -26.2 Td
.04 Tw
(We affirm the district court's judgment dismissing Colusa's) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
2.04 Tw
(claim for failure to negotiate in good faith. We reverse the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.8 Tw
(district court's judgment dismissing Colusa's other claims on) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.32 Tw
(the pleadings, and remand for further proceedings consistent) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(with this opinion. Colusa is entitled to its costs on appeal. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.2 Td
17.5 Tw
(AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(REMANDED IN PART.) Tj
1 0 0 1 156 346.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -1 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.58 Tw
(20) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We reject the State's contention that, if Colusa prevailed in establish-) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.2 Tw
(ing its fourth claim, the existing licenses would necessarily be void ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(ab ini-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.46 Tw
(tio) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(. It is true that, in ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Lockyer v. City and County of San Francisco) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, the) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.12 Tw
(Supreme Court of California held that marriage licenses issued by the City) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.5 Tw
(of San Francisco to same-sex couples in violation of state law were ) Tj
(void) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
2.61 Tw
(and of no legal effect from their inception.) Tj
( 33 Cal. 4th 1055, 1113) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.64 Tw
(\(2004\). In that case, however, the Supreme Court of California empha-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
2.63 Tw
(sized the ) Tj
(unusual, perhaps unprecedented, set of circumstances) Tj
( sur-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
4.28 Tw
(rounding the invalidation of the marriage licenses in question. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -11.2 Td
1.22 Tw
(Moreover, in reaching its conclusion, the court relied exclusively on the) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.61 Tw
(relevant provisions of California's Family Code and on case law address-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.42 Tw
(ing specifically marriages celebrated in violation of state law. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1113-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.9 Tw
(14. Thus, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Lockyer) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( is not controlling. The parties have directed our atten-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.27 Tw
(tion to no other caseand we could find nonein support of the proposi-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.52 Tw
(tion that, under California law, the district court may not limit relief to) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(future conduct if Colusa prevailed on the merits of its claim. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 346.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -12.75 m 300 -12.75 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10184) Tj
74.2418 0 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ACHIL) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(EHE) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ALIFORNIA) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
80 0 obj
4255
endobj
78 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 17 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 79 0 R
>>
endobj
1 0 obj
[ /PDF /Text ]
endobj
81 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
82 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Bold
/Flags 34
/FontBBox [ -168 -218 1000 935 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 139.00
/StemH 69.50
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 676
/XHeight 461
/Ascent 676
/Descent -205
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
6 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F1
/BaseFont /Times-Bold
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 570 570 570 570 570 300 300
250 333 555 500 500 1000 833 333 333 333 500 570 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 570 570 570 500
930 722 667 722 722 667 611 778 778 389 500 778 667 944 722 778
611 778 722 556 667 722 722 1000 722 722 667 333 278 333 581 500
333 500 556 444 556 444 333 500 556 278 333 556 278 833 556 500
556 556 444 389 333 556 500 722 500 500 444 394 220 394 520 400
722 556 444 500 500 500 500 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 722 722
667 611 556 500 500 500 556 556 500 778 722 722 722 722 722 667
500 333 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 278 500 500 333 333 556 556
667 500 500 500 250 667 540 350 333 500 500 500 1000 1000 722 500
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 556 333 333 300 333 333 333
1000 722 556 250 250 250 556 389 722 500 556 667 444 747 747 1000
389 1000 389 300 389 389 778 778 667 778 1000 330 778 778 722 722
722 722 722 500 750 278 750 750 278 500 722 556 278 500 500 220 ]
/Encoding 81 0 R
/FontDescriptor 82 0 R
>>
endobj
83 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
84 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Roman
/Flags 34
/FontBBox [ -168 -218 1000 898 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 84.00
/StemH 42.00
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 662
/XHeight 450
/Ascent 683
/Descent -217
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
7 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F2
/BaseFont /Times-Roman
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 564 564 564 564 564 300 300
250 333 408 500 500 833 778 333 333 333 500 564 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 564 564 564 444
921 722 667 667 722 611 556 722 722 333 389 722 611 889 722 722
556 722 667 556 611 722 722 944 722 722 611 333 278 333 469 500
333 444 500 444 500 444 333 500 500 278 278 500 278 778 500 500
500 500 333 389 278 500 500 722 500 500 444 480 200 480 541 400
667 500 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 722 722
611 556 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 722 722 722 722 722 722 611
444 333 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 180 444 500 333 333 556 556
611 500 500 500 250 611 453 350 333 444 444 500 1000 1000 722 444
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 500 333 333 300 333 333 333
1000 722 500 250 250 250 556 389 722 500 500 611 444 760 760 980
333 889 333 276 333 333 722 722 611 722 889 310 722 722 722 722
722 667 722 444 750 278 750 750 278 500 722 500 278 500 500 200 ]
/Encoding 83 0 R
/FontDescriptor 84 0 R
>>
endobj
85 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 240 /apple ]
>>
endobj
86 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Symbol
/Flags 4
/FontBBox [ -180 -293 1090 1010 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 85.00
/StemH 42.50
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 0
/XHeight 0
/Ascent 0
/Descent 0
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
8 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F3
/BaseFont /Symbol
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 333 713 500 549 833 778 439 333 333 500 549 250 549 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 549 549 549 444
549 722 667 722 612 611 763 603 722 333 631 722 686 889 722 722
768 741 556 592 611 690 439 768 645 795 611 333 863 333 658 500
500 631 549 549 494 439 521 411 603 329 603 549 549 576 521 549
549 521 549 603 439 576 713 686 493 686 494 480 200 480 549 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 620 247 549 167 713 500 753 753 753 753 1042 987 603 987 603
400 549 411 549 549 713 494 460 549 549 549 549 1000 603 1000 658
823 686 795 987 768 768 823 768 768 713 713 713 713 713 713 713
768 713 790 250 250 250 549 250 713 603 603 1042 987 603 987 603
494 329 790 790 786 713 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 494
790 329 274 686 686 686 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 250 ]
/Encoding 85 0 R
/FontDescriptor 86 0 R
>>
endobj
87 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
88 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Italic
/Flags 98
/FontBBox [ -169 -217 1010 883 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 76.00
/StemH 38.00
/ItalicAngle -15.50
/CapHeight 653
/XHeight 441
/Ascent 683
/Descent -205
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
9 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F4
/BaseFont /Times-Italic
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 675 675 675 675 675 300 300
250 333 420 500 500 833 778 333 333 333 500 675 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 675 675 675 500
920 611 611 667 722 611 611 722 722 333 444 667 556 833 667 722
611 722 611 500 556 722 611 833 611 556 556 389 278 389 422 500
333 500 500 444 500 444 278 500 500 278 278 444 278 722 500 500
500 500 389 389 278 500 444 667 444 444 389 400 275 400 541 400
667 500 444 500 500 500 500 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 611 611
611 611 500 500 500 500 500 500 444 722 722 611 611 611 611 611
500 389 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 214 556 500 333 333 500 500
611 500 500 500 250 611 523 350 333 556 556 500 889 1000 722 500
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 500 333 333 300 333 333 333
889 667 500 250 250 250 500 389 556 444 500 556 389 760 760 980
333 889 333 276 333 333 722 722 556 722 944 310 722 722 722 722
722 667 556 500 750 278 750 750 278 500 667 500 278 500 500 275 ]
/Encoding 87 0 R
/FontDescriptor 88 0 R
>>
endobj
89 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
90 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Helvetica-Bold
/Flags 32
/FontBBox [ -170 -228 1003 962 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 140.00
/StemH 70.00
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 718
/XHeight 532
/Ascent 718
/Descent -207
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
17 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F5
/BaseFont /Helvetica-Bold
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278
278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 584 584 584 584 584 333 333
278 333 474 556 556 889 722 278 333 333 389 584 278 333 278 278
556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 333 333 584 584 584 611
975 722 722 722 722 667 611 778 722 278 556 722 611 833 722 778
667 778 722 667 611 722 667 944 667 667 611 333 278 333 584 556
278 556 611 556 611 556 333 611 611 278 278 556 278 889 611 611
611 611 389 556 333 611 556 778 556 556 500 389 280 389 584 400
722 611 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 278 278 278 722 722
667 667 611 611 611 611 611 611 556 778 722 722 722 722 722 667
556 333 556 556 167 556 556 556 556 238 500 556 333 333 611 611
667 556 556 556 278 667 556 350 278 500 500 556 1000 1000 722 611
611 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 611 333 333 333 333 333 333
1000 722 611 278 278 278 667 556 667 556 611 611 500 737 737 1000
278 1000 278 370 278 278 778 778 611 778 1000 365 778 778 722 722
722 889 667 556 834 278 834 834 278 611 944 611 278 611 611 280 ]
/Encoding 89 0 R
/FontDescriptor 90 0 R
>>
endobj
10 0 obj
<<
/Kids [3 0 R 11 0 R 14 0 R 18 0 R 21 0 R 24 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 91 0 R
>>
endobj
30 0 obj
<<
/Kids [27 0 R 31 0 R 34 0 R 37 0 R 40 0 R 43 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 91 0 R
>>
endobj
49 0 obj
<<
/Kids [46 0 R 50 0 R 53 0 R 56 0 R 59 0 R 62 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 91 0 R
>>
endobj
68 0 obj
<<
/Kids [65 0 R 69 0 R 72 0 R 75 0 R 78 0 R]
/Count 5
/Type /Pages
/Parent 91 0 R
>>
endobj
91 0 obj
<<
/Kids [10 0 R 30 0 R 49 0 R 68 0 R]
/Count 23
/Type /Pages
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
>>
endobj
2 0 obj
<<
/Type /Catalog
/Pages 91 0 R
>>
endobj
92 0 obj
<<
/CreationDate (Thursday August 7, 2008 08:42:58)
/Creator (VERSACOMP R05.2)
/Producer (ECMP5)
>>
endobj
xref
0 93
0000000000 65535 f
0000103044 00000 n
0000115809 00000 n
0000003741 00000 n
0000000044 00000 n
0000003718 00000 n
0000104509 00000 n
0000107161 00000 n
0000108715 00000 n
0000111362 00000 n
0000115236 00000 n
0000006850 00000 n
0000003955 00000 n
0000006826 00000 n
0000011192 00000 n
0000007044 00000 n
0000011168 00000 n
0000114013 00000 n
0000015545 00000 n
0000011409 00000 n
0000015521 00000 n
0000020072 00000 n
0000015762 00000 n
0000020048 00000 n
0000023892 00000 n
0000020289 00000 n
0000023868 00000 n
0000028785 00000 n
0000024109 00000 n
0000028761 00000 n
0000115352 00000 n
0000033845 00000 n
0000029002 00000 n
0000033821 00000 n
0000038822 00000 n
0000034062 00000 n
0000038798 00000 n
0000043948 00000 n
0000039041 00000 n
0000043924 00000 n
0000048335 00000 n
0000044167 00000 n
0000048311 00000 n
0000053046 00000 n
0000048542 00000 n
0000053022 00000 n
0000057725 00000 n
0000053265 00000 n
0000057701 00000 n
0000115469 00000 n
0000062245 00000 n
0000057944 00000 n
0000062221 00000 n
0000066777 00000 n
0000062464 00000 n
0000066753 00000 n
0000071084 00000 n
0000066984 00000 n
0000071060 00000 n
0000075820 00000 n
0000071291 00000 n
0000075796 00000 n
0000080127 00000 n
0000076039 00000 n
0000080103 00000 n
0000084603 00000 n
0000080335 00000 n
0000084579 00000 n
0000115586 00000 n
0000089347 00000 n
0000084822 00000 n
0000089323 00000 n
0000093882 00000 n
0000089566 00000 n
0000093858 00000 n
0000098293 00000 n
0000094101 00000 n
0000098269 00000 n
0000102852 00000 n
0000098512 00000 n
0000102828 00000 n
0000103077 00000 n
0000104229 00000 n
0000105729 00000 n
0000106881 00000 n
0000108377 00000 n
0000108449 00000 n
0000109927 00000 n
0000111079 00000 n
0000112577 00000 n
0000113729 00000 n
0000115696 00000 n
0000115865 00000 n
trailer
<<
/Size 93
/Root 2 0 R
/Info 92 0 R
>>
startxref
116002
%%EOF
2 0 obj
<>
endobj
93 0 obj
<>
endobj
94 0 obj
<>stream
Thursday August 7, 2008 08:42:58
ECMP5
VERSACOMP R05.2
2008-08-14T09:55:53-06:00
2008-08-14T09:55:53-06:00
2008-08-14T09:55:53-06:00
application/pdf
Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community v. California
uuid:b5aeb62f-4f68-45f8-8339-08bcf9d074f1
uuid:dd45bb41-5cfc-4140-a178-fec6e39f646a
endstream
endobj
xref
2 1
0000117954 00000 n
93 2
0000118016 00000 n
0000118298 00000 n
trailer
<]/Prev 116002 >>
startxref
122082
%%EOF