California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. International Paper Company et al

Filing 8

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 9/8/11: Plaintiff's claims against defendants are hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Court shall retain and have jurisdiction over the parties with respect to disputes arising under the Consent Agreement. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

ANDREW L. PACKARD (State Bar No. 168690)
ERIK ROPER (State Bar No. 259756)
Law Offices of Andrew L. Packard
100 Petaluma Blvd. N Ste 301
Petaluma, CA 94952
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
ROBERT J. TUERCK (State Bar No. 255741)
Jackson & Tuerck
P. O. Box 148
429 W. Main Street, Suite C
Quincy, CA 95971
Tel: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff CALIFORNIA
SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14
15
16

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING
PROTECTION ALLIANCE, a non profit
corporation,
Plaintiff,

17
18
19
20

vs.
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, a
New York corporation, PAUL GALEA, an
individual, and CLARK WEISS, an
individual,

STIPULATION TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS WITH
PREJUDICE; ORDER GRANTING
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE [FRCP
41(a)(2)]

Defendants.

21
22

Case No. 2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD

TO THE COURT:

23

Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (“CSPA”), and Defendants

24

International Paper Company, Mr. Paul Galea and Mr. Clark Weiss (“Defendants”) (collectively,

25

the “Parties”) stipulate as follows:

26
27

WHEREAS, on or about February 25, 2011, CSPA provided Defendants with a Notice of
Violations and Intent to File Suit (“60-Day Notice Letter”) under Section 505 of the Federal

28
STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
927112.1

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD

1

1

Water Pollution Control Act (“Act” or “Clean Water Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1365;

2

WHEREAS, on April 27, 2011, CSPA filed its Complaint against Defendants in this

3

Court, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. City of Chico, (USDC, E.D. Cal., Case No.

4

2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD) and said Complaint incorporated by reference all of the allegations

5

contained in CSPA’s 60-Day Notice Letter;

6

WHEREAS, CSPA and Defendants, through their authorized representatives and without

7

either adjudication of CSPA’s claims or admission by Defendants of any alleged violation or

8

other wrongdoing, have chosen to resolve in full by way of settlement the allegations of CSPA as

9

set forth in CSPA’s 60-Day Notice Letter and Complaint, thereby avoiding the costs and

10

uncertainties of further litigation. A copy of the agreement (“Consent Agreement”) entered into

11

by and between CSPA and Defendants is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by

12

reference.

13

WHEREAS, CSPA submitted the Consent Agreement via certified mail, return receipt

14

requested, to the U.S. EPA and the U.S. Department of Justice (“the agencies”) and the 45-day

15

review period set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 135.5 has been completed without objection by the

16

agencies.

17

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed to by and between

18

the Parties that CSPA’s claims, as set forth in its 60-Day Notice Letter and Complaint, be

19

dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). The Parties

20

respectfully request an order from this Court dismissing such claims with prejudice. In

21

accordance with Clause 16 of the Consent Agreement, the Parties also request that this Court

22

retain and have jurisdiction over the Parties through September 30, 2013, for the sole purpose of

23

resolving any disputes between the parties with respect to enforcement of any provision of the

24

Consent Agreement.

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

//
STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
927112.1

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD

2

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

Dated: September ______, 2011

LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW L. PACKARD

2
3

By:___________________________________
Erik M. Roper
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION
ALLIANCE

4
5
6
7

Dated: September ______, 2011

8

INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY
By:____________________________________
Brian E. Heim, Chief Counsel, Environmental Law
International Paper Company
Attorneys for Defendants
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, et al

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
927112.1

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD

3

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

ORDER

2

Good cause appearing, and the Parties having stipulated and agreed,

3
4
5
6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance’s
claims against Defendants International Paper Company, Paul Galea and Clark Weiss as set forth
in CSPA’s 60-Day Notice Letter and Complaint filed in Case No. 2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD,
are hereby dismissed with prejudice.

7
8
9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain and have jurisdiction over the
Parties with respect to disputes arising under the Consent Agreement attached to the Parties’
Stipulation to Dismiss as Exhibit A.

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14
15

Dated: September 8, 2011

/s/ John A. Mendez____________
United States District Court Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
927112.1

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01126-JAM-DAD

4