Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00023/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00023-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1319 Clean Water Act

---

LINDA M. DARDARIAN, CA Bar No. 131001

NINA RABIN, CA Bar No. 229403

GOLDSTEIN, DEMCHAK, BALLER, 

BORGEN & DARDARIAN

300 Lakeside Drive, Suite 1000

Oakland, CA 94612

(510) 763-9800

(510) 835-1417 (fax)

ldar@gdblegal.com

nrabin@gdblegal.com

MICHAEL R. LOZEAU, CA Bar No. 142893

LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL R. LOZEAU

1516 Oak Street, Suite 216

Alameda, CA 94501

(510) 749-9102

(510) 749-9103 (fax)

mrlozeau@lozeaulaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff CALIFORNIA 

SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE

PAUL P. “SKIP” SPAULDING, III, CA Bar No. 83922

DAVID J. LAZERWITZ, CA Bar No. 221349

FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL, LLP

235 Montgomery Street

San Francisco, CA 94104

(415) 954-4400

(415) 954-4480 (fax)

sspaulding@fbm.com

dlazerwitz@fbm.com

Attorneys for Defendant

MERIDIAN GOLD COMPANY, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION

ALLIANCE, a non-profit corporation,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MERIDIAN GOLD COMPANY, a corporation

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:06-cv-00023-REC-LJO

STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND

EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR

ANSWERING COMPLAINT

Case 1:06-cv-00023-REC-LJO Document 9 Filed 04/21/06 Page 1 of 4
WHEREAS, on June 1, 2005, Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance

(“CSPA”) provided to Defendant Meridian Gold Company, Inc. and its related or

affiliated entities, including Meridian Beartrack Company (collectively “Meridian”) a

written notice of alleged violations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C.

§§ 1251 to 1387 (also known as the “Clean Water Act”), California Health and Safety

Code, § 25249.5 (also known as “Proposition 65”), and Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 to 6692 (“RCRA”), and the General Permit arising

from Meridian’s operation of the Royal Mountain King Mine, located at 4461 Rock

Creek Road near the City of Copperopolis, California. In this June 1, 2005 Notice Letter,

CSPA notified Meridian of CSPA’s intention to file suit against Meridian regarding these

alleged violations. The CSPA Notice Letter was sent to the Administrator of the United

States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”); the Administrator of EPA Region IX;

the Executive Director of the State Water Resources Control Board (“State Board”); the

Executive Officer of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region

(“Regional Board”); and to Meridian, pursuant to Section 505 of the Clean Water Act, 33

U.S.C. § 1365, Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25249.7(d)(1), and 42 U.S.C. §

6972(b)(2)(A) of RCRA.

WHEREAS, on January 6, 2006, CSPA filed a Complaint against Meridian in the United

States District Court, Eastern District of California, alleging violations of the Clean

Water Act, Proposition 65 and the General Permit.

WHEREAS, on April 6, 2006, CSPA filed a First Amended Complaint (“Complaint”)

against Meridian in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California,

alleging violations of the RCRA in addition to the existing allegations.

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, CSPA served the First Amended Complaint, Order

Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference and related materials upon Meridian.

WHEREAS, Meridian denies CSPA’s allegations that it has violated the CWA,

Proposition 65, RCRA and/or the General Permit and denies that it has any liability

whatsoever to CSPA.

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, CSPA and Meridian reached a full settlement that is

embodied in a Consent Agreement and Order (“Consent Agreement”), which resolves

this litigation and all of the claims raised in CSPA’s Complaint and First Amended

Complaint.

WHEREAS, on April 7, 2006, CSPA submitted the First Amended Complaint to the

United States Department of Justice pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 135.4, and on April 13,

2006, CSPA submitted the proposed Consent Agreement to the United States Department

of Justice for the 45-day statutory review period, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 1365(c).

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, CSPA submitted the First Amended Complaint to the

Attorney General of the State of California, and on April 13, 2006, CSPA submitted the

proposed Consent Agreement to the Attorney General of the State of California, pursuant

to the reporting requirement of Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25249.7.

WHEREAS, by April 21, 2006, CSPA will be filing an unopposed motion with this

Court seeking approval of the proposed Consent Agreement in conformance with the

applicable federal and state laws on which it is based, and CSPA anticipates that the

Court’s decision on the motion can occur by June 1, 2006.

WHEREAS, because a settlement has been reached and embodied in a proposed

Consent Agreement, there appears to be no purpose to require Meridian to respond to the

Case 1:06-cv-00023-REC-LJO Document 9 Filed 04/21/06 Page 2 of 4
First Amended Complaint or for the Parties and the Court to hold the Mandatory

Scheduling Conference.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED BY AND

BETWEEN THE PARTIES TO THIS ACTION, BY AND THROUGH THEIR

RESPECTIVE COUNSEL, THAT:

1. The Scheduling Conference currently set before Magistrate Judge

Lawrence J. O’Neill on May 3, 2006, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 8, shall be vacated.

2. The April 26, 2006 deadline for the Parties to file a Joint Scheduling

Report shall be vacated.

3. The deadline for Meridian to answer Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint

shall be extended to July 31, 2006.

Dated: April ___ , 2006 GOLDSTEIN, DEMCHAK, BALLER, BORGEN

& DARDARIAN

By:

Linda M. Dardarian

Attorneys for California Sportfishing Protection

Alliance

Dated: April ___ , 2006 FARELLA, BRAUN & MARTEL LLP

By:

Paul P. “Skip” Spaulding, III

David J. Lazerwitz

Attorneys for Meridian Gold Company, Inc.

ORDER

The provisions of the foregoing stipulation are hereby approved, and

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Scheduling Conference currently set before Magistrate Judge

Lawrence J. O’Neill on May 3, 2006, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 8, is vacated.

2. The April 26, 2006 deadline for the Parties to file a joint scheduling report

is vacated.

Case 1:06-cv-00023-REC-LJO Document 9 Filed 04/21/06 Page 3 of 4
3. The deadline for Meridian to answer Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint

is extended to July 31, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 19, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

66h44d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00023-REC-LJO Document 9 Filed 04/21/06 Page 4 of 4