Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00121/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00121-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1365 Environmental Matters

---

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

29

30

31

Christopher Sproul (State Bar No. 126398)

Jodene Isaacs (State Bar No. 226895)

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES

5135 Anza Street

San Francisco, California 94121

Telephone: (415) 533-3376, (510) 847-3467

Facsimile: (415) 358-5695

Email: csproul@enviroadvocates.com

Email: jisaacs@enviroadvocates.com 

William Verick (State Bar No. 140972)

Klamath Environmental Law Center

Fredric Evenson (State Bar No. 198059)

Law Offices of Fredric Evenson

424 First Street

Eureka, California 95501

Telephone: (707) 268-8900

Facsimile: (707) 268-8901

Email: wverick@igc.org, ecorights@earthlink.net

Attorneys for Plaintiff

ECOLOGICAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ECOLOGICAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION,

 Plaintiff,

v.

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY.

 Defendant.

Civil No. 3:10-CV-00121-RS

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF

LEAVE TO FILE THIRD AMENDED 

COMPLAINT 

 

*E-Filed 8/23/10*

Case 3:10-cv-00121-RS Document 65 Filed 08/23/10 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE 

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Page 1

 

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

29

30

31

STIPULATION

WHEREAS, on January 11, 2010, Plaintiff Ecological Rights Foundation filed a Complaint 

for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Civil Penalties under Clean Water Act (“CWA”) section 

505(a)(1), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(a)(1), seeking relief for the alleged unlawful discharge of pollutants 

from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (“PG&E”)’s corporation yards and service centers located 

throughout Northern California (“the Facilities”) into waters of the United States in violation of the 

CWA. See Docket Doc. No. 1;

WHEREAS, on April 8, 2010, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion for Leave to File First 

Amended Complaint and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof (“Motion for 

Leave to File First Amended Complaint”), seeking to provide additional detail on the background 

statutory law applicable to this case and the specific way in which Plaintiff alleges that PG&E has 

violated that law at the Facilities;

WHEREAS, on April 13, 2010, Plaintiff and PG&E filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order 

Regarding Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (“Stipulation and Proposed Order”);

WHEREAS, in the Stipulation and Proposed Order, PG&E agreed not to oppose Plaintiff’s 

then-pending Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint and Plaintiff agreed that PG&E 

would not be obligated to answer or otherwise plead to the First Amended Complaint because of 

Plaintiff’s intention to soon file a Second Amended Complaint; 

WHEREAS, on April 14, 2010, the Court granted the Stipulation and Proposed Order, as 

modified;

WHEREAS, on February 9, 2010, Plaintiff served a Notice of Violation and Intent to File 

Suit Under the CWA and Resource Recovery and Conservation Act (“RCRA”) (“Notice Letter”) on 

PG&E, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and relevant State agencies as required by the 

notice provisions of the CWA and RCRA. See CWA section 505(b), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(b); RCRA 

section 7002(b)(2)(A), 42 U.S.C. 6972 (b)(2)(A);

WHEREAS, pursuant to the notice provisions of RCRA, Plaintiff was required to wait 90 

days from the date of service of the Notice Letter before filing suit under RCRA; 

Case 3:10-cv-00121-RS Document 65 Filed 08/23/10 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE 

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Page 2

 

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

29

30

31

WHEREAS, after the expiration of the 90-day notice period, on May 13, 2010, Plaintiff and 

Defendant filed a stipulation and proposed order granting Plaintiff leave to file a Second Amended 

Complaint to add a claim under RCRA section 7002(a)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. § 6972 (a)(1)(B), and to 

make certain changes to the factual allegations in support of the CWA claims;

WHEREAS, the stipulation of May 13, 2010 provided that PG&E would not be obligated to 

file an Answer or other responsive pleading to the Second Amended Complaint due to Plaintiff’s 

intention to soon file a Third Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, on May 13, 2010, the Court granted the stipulation for leave to file the Second 

Amended Complaint (Docket Doc. No. 35); 

WHEREAS, on April 9, 2010, Plaintiff served a Supplemental Notice of Violation and Intent 

to File Suit Under the Clean Water Act and Resource Recovery and Conservation Act 

(“Supplemental Notice Letter”), to identify one additional facility at which Plaintiff alleges that 

PG&E has violated the CWA and RCRA; 

WHEREAS, the 90-day notice period has now expired on the Supplemental Notice Letter, 

and Plaintiff seeks leave to file a Third Amended Complaint to incorporate the new facility into its 

pleadings;

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby stipulate, by and through counsel, that: 

1. Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend to file the Third Amended 

Complaint; 

2. PG&E’s Answer or other responsive pleading to the Third Amended 

Complaint will be due in accordance with the schedule established by the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure. 

Dated: August 5, 2010

/s/ Bradley S. Rochlen 

Bradley S. Rochlen

Foley & Lardner LLP

321 North Clark Street, Ste. 2800

Chicago, IL 60654 

Case 3:10-cv-00121-RS Document 65 Filed 08/23/10 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE 

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Page 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

29

30

31

(312) 832.4906

brochlen@foley.com

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 

PG&E

_________________________

Christopher Sproul

Environmental Advocates

5135 Anza Street

San Francisco, CA 94121

(415) 386-6709

csproul@enviroadvocates.com

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

ECOLOGICAL RIGHTS 

FOUNDATION

Case 3:10-cv-00121-RS Document 65 Filed 08/23/10 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE 

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Page 4

 

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

29

30

31

PROPOSED ORDER

On August 5, 2010, Plaintiff Ecological Rights Foundation and Defendant Pacific Gas & 

Electric Company filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order Granting Plaintiff Leave to File Third

Amended Complaint (“the Stipulation”). Having considered the Stipulation, and good cause 

appearing, the Court hereby GRANTS the Stipulation and orders as follows:

Plaintiff is granted leave to file the Third Amended Complaint, which will be deemed filed 

on the date it is lodged with the Court. PG&E’s Answer or other responsive pleading to the Third

Amended Complaint will be due in accordance with the schedule established by the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ___________________ ____________________________

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Judge

8/23/10

Case 3:10-cv-00121-RS Document 65 Filed 08/23/10 Page 5 of 5