ptltiieb Btrxfe% aallri af &yea153 
September Term, 2003 
Filed On: 
FOR DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 
9 6 ~ ~ 0 1 2 8 5 
CLERK 
NO. 03-5262 
Elouise Pepion Cobell, et al., 
Appellees 
V. 
Gale A. Norton, as the Secretary of the Interior and 
A n 1 m . - - L : . - n-~:.--. A - - : - L - . - L ~ - - - - L - - . . nurerie IVI. iviariiri, nr;itriy n s s i s t a r i i atxieiaiy UI 
I n t e r i o r- I n d i a n Aff a i rs , 
Appellants 
Consolidated with 04-5084 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 
-r 
BEFORE: Ginsburg, Chief Judge, and Randolph and Rogers, 
Circuit Judges 
O R D E R 
Upon consideration of the emergency motion for stay pending appeal filed in No. 
04-5084; the opposition thereto, and motion to vacate the administrative stay issued on 
March 24, 2004; the reply to the opposition to the motion for stay pending appeal, and 
opposition to the motion to vacate the administrative stay; the reply to the opposition to 
the motion to vacate the administrative stay; the motion to exceed word limits for 
appellees' brief; the response thereto; and the reply, it is 
ORDERED that the administrative stay be dissolved, that the motion for stay 
pending appeal be granted, and that the district court's preliminary injunction issued on 
March 15, 2004 be stayed to the extent that the injunction requires disconnection from the 
internet of "Information Technology Systems" that were connected as of that date. 
Appellants have made a substantial case on the merits, and the remaining stay factors, 
particularly the irreparable harm to the appellants if a stay is not granted, strongly favor 
the grant of a stay. See Washinston Metropolitan Area Transit Commission v. Holidav 
Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841, 843 (D.C. Cir. 1977); D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and 
Internal Procedures 33 (2002). It is FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 
NO. 03-5262 
pxziteb $tab3 aaurt af &ppeals 
September Term, 2003 
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to vacate the administrative stay be 
dismissed as moot. It is 
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to exceed word limits for appellees’ brief be 
denied.