Pruitt

Pineros Y Campesinos Unidos Del Noroeste v. Pruitt

Good Law
293 F. Supp. 3d 1062
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 21, 2018Case No. 17–cv–03434–JSWCalifornia2,253 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

White, J.

Now before the Court is the motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiffs. The Court has considered the parties' papers, relevant legal authority, and the record in this case, and the Court finds the motion suitable for disposition without oral argument. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons stated below, the Court HEREBY GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment.

A. Background.

Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural background contained in the administrative record, the Court provides only a brief summary.

In January 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") promulgated a rule which strengthened the regulations surrounding the certification and use of "restricted use pesticides" ("RUP"). ("Pesticide Rule") The Pesticide Rule had an effective date of March 6, 2017, and established a three-year implementation schedule which required States to submit certification plans consistent with the Pesticide Rule by March 4, 2020. See 40 C.F.R. § 171.5 (a), (b), (c). During this three year period, EPA was to work with the States and other pesticide certifying-authorities to develop revised certification plans to ensure compliance with the…

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.