Industry Interveners Argue that California Court Has to Decide Their Jurisdictional Motion
Environmental NGOs are suing EPA, asking a California federal district court to essentially take over EPA’s pesticide program because EPA allegedly failed to meet all its pesticide obligations under the Endangered Species Act. At the Government’s and NGO’s request, the case has been stayed to allow settlement negotiations. Several industry Interveners filed motions to dismiss the NGO plaintiffs’ complaint for lack of jurisdiction over the case; to allow their intervention for all purposes in the case; and to lift the stay of the case. The Interveners include CropLife America and the American Chemistry Council. The court has not yet granted them full participation in the case. The Government Defendants and NGO Plaintiffs oppose the industry Intervener motions, and want the stay continued to allow settlement negotiations to continue.
On March 13, 2012, the industry Interveners filed two replies to the Government’s and NGO’s oppositions. One reply essentially argues that the court has to decide their jurisdictional motion to dismiss now because the court has a duty first to determine whether it has any jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ claims before it proceeds any further. The Interveners’ other reply repeats their lack-of-jurisdiction argument and also argues they have a right to full intervention in the case.
●Click below to read Interveners’ jurisdictional Reply
●Click below to read Intervener’s intervention Reply
| Print article |
