United States Ninth Circuit

In a treaty fishing rights case, in which plaintiff requested a determination of the scope of defendant tribe's usual and accustomed dishing grounds and stations (U&A), the district court's conclusion, that a 1975 ruling did not intend to exclude the contested areas from defendant's U&A, is affirmed where plaintiff did not meet its burden to show that the contested areas should be excluded.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/27/2015
• Published 07/27/2015

Judges

• Paez

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel