Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01161/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01161-0/pdf.json

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

---

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 

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE; CASE NO. 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 1

ANDREW L. PACKARD (Cal. Bar No. 168690) 

MICHAEL P. LYNES (Cal. Bar No. 230462) 

Law Offices of Andrew L. Packard 

319 Pleasant Street 

Petaluma, CA 94952 

Tel: (707) 763-7227 

Fax: (707) 763-9227 

E-mail: andrew@packardlawoffices.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff CALIFORNIA 

MICHAEL R. LOZEAU (Cal. Bar No. 142893) 

Law Office of Michael R. Lozeau 

1516 Oak Street, Suite 216 

Alameda, CA 94501 

Tel: (510) 749-9102 

Fax: (510) 749-9103 

E-mail: mrlozeau@lozeaulaw.com

SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING 

PROTECTION ALLIANCE, a non profit 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

STOCKTON TRI INDUSTRIES, INC. 

 Defendant. 

Case No. 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD

STIPULATION TO DISMISS 

PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS WITH 

PREJUDICE; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE [FRCP 41(a)(2)] 

 

WHEREAS, on February 6, 2006, Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 

(“CSPA”) provided Defendant Stockton Tri Industries, Inc. (“STI”) with a Notice of Violations 

and Intent to File Suit (“Notice”) under Clean Water Act §505, 33 U.S.C. §1365. 

WHEREAS, on May 26, 2006 CSPA filed its Complaint against STI in this Court, 

California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Stockton Tri Industries, Inc. Case No. 2:06-cv001161-WBS-DAD. Said Complaint incorporates by reference all of the allegations contained in 

CSPA’s Notice. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD Document 18 Filed 01/24/07 Page 1 of 3
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 

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE; CASE NO. 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 2

WHEREAS, CSPA and STI, through their authorized representatives and without either 

adjudication of CSPA’s claims or admission by STI of any alleged violation or other wrongdoing, 

have chosen to resolve in full by way of settlement the allegations of CSPA as set forth in the 

Notice and Complaint, thereby avoiding the costs and uncertainties of further litigation. A copy 

of the [Proposed] Consent Agreement entered into by and between CSPA and STI is attached 

hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. 

WHEREAS, the parties submitted the Settlement Agreement via certified mail, return 

receipt requested, to the U.S. EPA and the U.S. Department of Justice and the 45-day review 

period set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 135.5 has completed. 

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

parties that CSPA’s claims, as set forth in the Notice and Complaint, be dismissed with prejudice 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). The parties respectfully request an order 

from this Court dismissing such claims with prejudice. In accordance with paragraph 14 of the 

Consent Agreement, the parties also request that this Court retain and have jurisdiction over the 

Parties with respect to disputes arising under the agreement. 

Dated: January 22, 2007 LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW L. PACKARD 

By:/s/ Michael Lynes___________________________ 

Michael Lynes 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Dated: January 22, 2007 SOMACH, SIMMONS & DUNN LLP 

By:/s/ Kanwarijit S. Dua_________________________ 

Kanwarijit S. Dua 

Attorney for Defendant 

[electronically signed and filed with consent of counsel] 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD Document 18 Filed 01/24/07 Page 2 of 3
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 

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE; CASE NO. 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 3

ORDER 

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

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance’s 

claims against Stockton Tri Industries, Inc., as set forth in the Notice and Complaint filed in Case 

No. 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD, are hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain and have jurisdiction over the 

Parties with respect to disputes arising under the agreement attached to the parties’ Stipulation to 

Dismiss as Exhibit D. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 23, 2007 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:06-cv-01161-WBS-DAD Document 18 Filed 01/24/07 Page 3 of 3