Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01559/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01559-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 33:1365 Environmental Matters

---

Order re: United States’ Dispositive Motions Regarding Plaintiff’s RCRA and HSAA Claims

City of Fresno v. United States of America et al., No. 1:06-cv-01559-OWW-GSA

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

Ignacia S. Moreno

Assistant Attorney General

Environment & Natural Resources Division

C. Scott Spear

Kim N. Smaczniak

Paul Cirino

Environmental Defense Section

United States Department of Justice

P.O. Box 23986

Washington, DC 20026-3986

(202) 514-1542 (telephone)

(202) 514-8865 (facsimile)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE CITY OF FRESNO,

Plaintiff,

v.

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED 

STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 

NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU and THE 

BOEING COMPANY, 

 

Defendants.

 No. 1:06-cv-01559-OWW-GSA

ORDER GRANTING THE UNITED 

STATES’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL 

JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS 

OR FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT AS TO PLAINTIFF’S 

RCRA CLAIM; MOTION FOR 

PARTIAL JUDGMENT ON THE 

PLEADINGS AS TO PLAINTIFF’S 

HSAA CLAIM (Docs. 142 & 143.)

Defendants United States of America, United States Army Corps of Engineers, and 

National Guard Bureau (collectively, “United States”) filed a Motion for Judgment on the 

Pleadings or for Partial Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff’s Claim Under the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) (Doc. 142), as well as a Motion for Partial Judgment 

on the Pleadings as to Plaintiff’s Claim Under the California Hazardous Substance Account Act 

(“HSAA”) (Doc. 143.) The motions came on for hearing on March 22, 2010. All parties were 

represented by counsel at the hearing.

Case 1:06-cv-01559-OWW -GSA Document 234 Filed 04/28/10 Page 1 of 2
Order re: United States’ Dispositive Motions Regarding Plaintiff’s RCRA and HSAA Claims

City of Fresno v. United States of America et al., No. 1:06-cv-01559-OWW-GSA

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

After considering all papers filed in connection with the United States’ motions and 

hearing oral argument, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

1. The United States’ motion for partial summary judgment on Plaintiff’s RCRA 

claim (Doc. 142) is GRANTED for the reasons set forth in this Court’s Memorandum Decision 

dated April 22, 2010 (Doc. 228), which is incorporated herein by reference. Plaintiff's claim 

against the United States under RCRA, as alleged in the Fourth Claim for Relief of the Second 

Amended Complaint, is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

2. The United States’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings on Plaintiff’s 

HSAA claim (Doc. 143) is GRANTED for the reasons set forth in this Court’s Memorandum 

Decision dated April 22, 2010 (Doc. 228), which is incorporated herein by reference. Plaintiff’s 

claim against the United States under HSAA, as alleged in the Third Claim for Relief of the 

Second Amended Complaint, is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 27, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

emm0d64h

Case 1:06-cv-01559-OWW -GSA Document 234 Filed 04/28/10 Page 2 of 2