San Francisco Baykeeper v. Sunnyvale

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 12, 20255:20-cv-00824California2,605 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER, Case No. 5:20-cv-00824-EJD

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

v.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE, et al., Re: ECF No. 278 Defendants.

Two months ago, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in City and County of San Francisco v. EPA (“CCSF”), 145 S. Ct. 704 (2025). There, the Supreme Court held that discharge permits issued under the Clean Water Act, which regulate pollutant discharges into certain bodies of water, cannot contain “end-result” limitations. According to Defendants—the Cities of Sunnyvale and Mountain View—the permit limitations they are being accused of violating in this matter are precisely such unallowable end-result limitations. As such, the Cities now move for reconsideration of several of the Court’s prior orders granting relief against the Cities. After reviewing the submissions on this issue, the Court finds oral argument to be unnecessary under…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.