and Meridian's potential (due process) claim that, title having passed, it cannot now be disturbed by a judgment in a case to which Meridian was not a party. Finally, as is shown by plaintiffs' joinder of Meridian, they recognize that Meridian's absence would prevent the Court from granting them complete relief and returning matters to the status quo ante. All of these considerations compel the conclusion that Meridian is a necessary party under Rule 19(a). See McKenna v. Udall, 135 U.S. App. D.C. 335, 418 F.2d 1171, 1174 (D.C.Cir.1969).
Similar reasoning compels the conclusion that Meridian is an indispensable party under Rule 19(b).
As explained above, a full, fair, and adequate judgment that does not prejudice the plaintiffs, the government, or Meridian cannot be reached in Meridian's absence. None of the parties has suggested, nor has the Court itself divined, a satisfactory means by which these problems could be resolved or even mitigated by a careful shaping of any judgment or relief. Finally, the District Court for the District of Montana constitutes an adequate alternative forum
in which Meridian
and the other defendants
may be joined and the "Circle West" suits be heard.
For the reasons stated, the Court will grant the motions of the private defendants in Nos. 83-3320 and 83-3330 to dismiss these cases pursuant to Rule 19, Fed.R.Civ.P.
Accordingly, it is this 28th day of November, 1984
ORDERED that the motions of private defendants in Nos. 83-3320 and 83-3330 to dismiss be and they are hereby granted, and it is further
ORDERED that National Coal Association v. Clark, Civil Action No. 83-3320, and Northern Plains Resource Council v. Clark, Civil Action No. 83-3330 be and they are hereby dismissed, and it is further
ORDERED that oral argument will be heard on the pending motion to dismiss or for summary judgment in National Coal Association v. Clark, Civil Action No. 83-2985, on January 11, 1985, at 10:00 a.m.