Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02328/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02328-2/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 

- 1 - 

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL Case No. 2:14−CV−02328−KJM−AC 

ANDREW L. PACKARD (State Bar No. 168690) 

WILLIAM N. CARLON (State Bar No. 305739) 

Law Offices of Andrew L. Packard 

100 Petaluma Blvd. N., Suite 301 

Petaluma, CA 94952 

Tel: (707) 763-7227 

Fax: (707) 763-9227 

E-mail: Andrew@packardlawoffices.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING 

PROTECTION ALLIANCE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING 

PROTECTION ALLIANCE, a non-profit 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT 

AND PRODUCTION COMPANY, INC., 

and ROBERT SMYTHE, 

 Defendants. 

 

Case No. 2:14−CV−02328−KJM−AC

STIPULATION TO DISMISS 

PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS WITH 

PREJUDICE; ORDER GRANTING 

DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

[FRCP 41(a)(2)]

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

above-captioned action, stipulate as follows:

 WHEREAS, on or about August 6, 2014, CSPA provided Defendants with Notices of 

Violations and Intent to File Suit (“60-Day Notice Letter”) under Section 505 of the Federal 

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

 WHEREAS, on October 6, 2014, CSPA filed its Complaint against Defendants in this 

Court, and said Complaint incorporated by reference all of the allegations contained in 

CSPA’s 60-Day Notice Letters;

Case 2:14-cv-02328-KJM-AC Document 37 Filed 09/14/16 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 

- 2 - 

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL Case No. 2:14−CV−02328−KJM−AC 

 WHEREAS, CSPA and Defendants, through their authorized representatives and 

without either adjudication of CSPA’s claims or admission by Defendants 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 CSPA’s 60-Day Notice Letters and Complaint, thereby 

avoiding the costs and uncertainties of further litigation. A copy of the Parties’ proposed 

consent agreement (“Consent Agreement”) entered into by and between CSPA and 

Defendants is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference;

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

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

the 45-day review period set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 135.5 has now expired;

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

the Parties that CSPA’s claims, as set forth in its 60-Day Notice Letter 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 17 of the Consent Agreement, the Parties also request that this 

Court retain and have jurisdiction over the Parties through August 6, 2019, for the sole 

purpose of resolving any disputes between the Parties with respect to enforcement of any 

provision of the Consent Agreement. 

Dated: September 9, 2016 Respectfully submitted, 

 

 LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW L. PACKARD 

 By: /s/ Andrew L. Packard______________ 

 Andrew L. Packard 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

 

Dated: September 9, 2016 BONNIE BAKER, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

 By: /s/ Bonnie Baker 

 Bonnie Baker 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

 

Case 2:14-cv-02328-KJM-AC Document 37 Filed 09/14/16 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 

- 3 - 

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL Case No. 2:14−CV−02328−KJM−AC 

ORDER

 Good cause appearing, and the court APPROVES the parties’ stipulation to dismiss 

plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance’s claims against defendants Agricultural 

Management and Production Company, Inc., and Robert Smythe with prejudice under 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). While the court in its discretion typically declines 

to maintain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement, Kokkonen 

v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381 (1994); cf. Collins v. Thompson, 8 F.3d 

657, 659 (9th Cir. 1993), in this case the court understands the parties engaged in significant 

settlement discussions with the assigned magistrate judge prior to ultimately settling 

according to terms of their Consent Agreement. Although the parties have not consented to 

magistrate judge jurisdiction, this court will in this case make an exception and RETAIN 

jurisdiction to enforce the terms of settlement through August 6, 2019. In the event a motion 

to enforce terms of the Consent Agreement is filed, the court anticipates referring the matter 

to the magistrate judge for initial review and preparation of findings and recommendations. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 13, 2016. 

Case 2:14-cv-02328-KJM-AC Document 37 Filed 09/14/16 Page 3 of 3