Californians for Alternatives to Toxics et al v USFWS et al

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 10/29/2010 ORDERING McCamman's Motion to Dismiss 17 GRANTED. (Krueger, M)

Download PDF
Californians for Alternatives to Toxics et al v USFWS et al Doc. 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----oo0oo---CALIFORNIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO TOXICS, a non-profit corporation; WILDERNESS WATCH, a non-profit corporation; THE FRIENDS OF SILVER CREEK, a California non-profit corporation; LAUREL AMES, an individual and ANN MCCAMPBELL, an individual, Plaintiffs, v. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE; ALEXANDRA PITTS, in her official capacity; JOHN MCCAMMAN, in his official capacity, Defendants. _____________________________/ ----oo0oo---This matter is before the court on defendant John McCamman's ("McCamman") motion to dismiss the instant action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) on the grounds that he is being sued only in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Fish and Game, and as such, claims 1 NO. 2:10-cv-1477 FCD KJM MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 against him are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. In their reply, plaintiffs concede that neither defendant McCamman, nor the California Department of Fish and Game have accepted, by writing or any other conduct, this court's jurisdiction. Plaintiffs further concede that sovereign immunity serves as "a legal basis to dismiss Fish and Game from this case." Response, filed Oct. 8, 2010, at 3.) (Pls.' Accordingly, defendant McCamman's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 29, 2010 FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?