United States v. Polaris Industries, Inc.

I. INTRODUCTION

19 Before the Court are two motions: Defendants Polaris Industries Inc. and 20 Polaris Sales Inc.’s (collectively “Polaris”) Motion to Dismiss, (Mot. to Dismiss 21 (“Polaris Motion”), ECF No. 29), and Defendant Ernest Yanez, Jr.’s Motion to 22 Dismiss (Mot. to Dismiss (“Yanez Motion”), ECF No. 31). For the following reasons, 23 the Court DENIES Polaris’s Motion and GRANTS Yanez’s Motion.1

25 26

28 1 Having carefully considered the papers filed in connection with the Motions, the Court deemed the matters appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The United States (“Government”) owns National Forest System lands in San 3 Bernardino County, California and brings this action against Polaris and individual 4 Defendant Yanez on behalf of the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest 5 Service. (First Am. Compl. (“FAC”), ¶ 1, ECF No. 28.) Polaris is a corporation that 6 designed, manufactured, marketed, and sold off-highway vehicles that allegedly posed 7 serious fire risks and had a history of malfunctioning …