United States v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

Good Law
178 F. Supp. 3d 927·2016 WL 1559647·100 Fed. R. Serv. 243·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52472
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 18, 2016Case No. 14-cr-00175-TEHCalifornia19,608 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henderson, J.

ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Defendant Pacific Gas and Electric Company (“PG&E”) and the Government submitted simultaneous motions in limine on January 11, 2016. Dkt. Nos. 236, 237. Both parties timely opposed and replied in support of their respective motions. Dkt. Nos. 277, 281, 300, 308. The Court held limited oral argument on April 12, 2016. After carefully considering the parties’ written and oral arguments, the Court now GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the parties’ motions in limine, as set forth below.

BACKGROUND

On September 9, 2010, a gas line owned and operated by PG&E ruptured, causing significant , damage to a residential community in San Bruno, California. Superseding Indictment (“SI”) ¶ 6 (Dkt. No. 22). PG&E stands charged with one count of obstructing the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) investigation that followed the San Bruno explosion. Id. ¶ 61. PG&E is also charged with 12 counts of violating the minimum federal safety standards for the transportation of natural gas by pipeline (“Pipeline Safety Act”), as set forth in 49 C.F.R. pt. 192 (“Part 192”). Id. ¶¶ 62-75. Congress criminalized “knowing and willful” violations of these minimum standards…

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.