Search Site
Menu
7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 240 | Pleasanton, California 94566

The U.S. Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit upheld a prior dismissal of a lawsuit brought by the California Construction Trucking Association (CCTA) against the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) diesel engine emissions regulations. The judges in the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the case based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction for a federal preemption challenge to a California environmental regulation regardingdiesel trucks in the state.

Facts of the Case

In the case ofCalifornia Dump Truck Owners Association v. Mary D. Nichols & Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., in 2008, CARB adopted the Truck and Bus Regulation to help the state meet the federal EPA standards for fine particulate matter and ozone. “Broadly speaking, it requires heavy-duty diesel trucks, whose emissions contribute significantly to PM and ozone pollution, to be upgraded with pollution filters and lower-emission engines,” and it took effect on January 1, 2012.

The California Dump Truck Owners Association, now the CCTA, argued that the state of California had violated the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act that “prohibits states from enacting any law, rule, or regulation affecting the price, routes or services of motor carriers,” and filed suit in April 2011. The CCTA claimed that as a result of the regulation, its motor carrier members would have to increase prices and alter their routes and services to offset the costs of complying with the regulation.

Throughout this time, the regulation passed the inspection of the EPA and was incorporated into federal law. As a result, in December 2012 the trial court dismissed the suit after finding that it no longer had subject matter jurisdiction over the case. It further found that, even if it retained jurisdiction, dismissal was proper under the federal rules of civil procedure because the EPA was a necessary and indispensable party. The CCTA appealed both grounds for the district court’s dismissal.

Ruling of the Court

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling of the lower district court, holding that “the Environmental Protection Agency’s approval of the regulation as part of California’s state implementation plan divested the district court of jurisdiction” under theClean Air Act. The judges held that the dismissal hinged on a technicality that requires the EPA to be a part of the proceedings, which the initial lawsuit brought by the CCTA did not do.

The CCTA disagrees with the appellate court’s ruling, calling the decision “disappointing but not surprising. At virtually every step of the way, well-funded environmental groups united with CARB delayed the case and prevented the courts from hearing the merits of our federal preemption argument. In addition, the group claims that the original lawsuit never directly challenged the Clean Air Act or the EPA’s adoption of the state’s regulation. According to the group’s spokesperson, the group plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Contact a California Transportation Law Attorney

If you have questions regarding how this ruling may affect your transportation business or have other questions regarding transportation law in Pleasanton, Alameda County, or the Tri-Valley area let the experienced attorneys atGarcia & Gurney help. Call the office orcontact us today for a confidential review of your case.

CA Upholds Dismissal Diesel 10Mar15

 

Contact us

Please fill out the form below and one of our attorneys will contact you.

Quick Contact Form

Awards/Affiliations
Events and News
  • "New Laws for 2018November 15, 2017"

  • "E-Contracts & E-Signatures: Benefits and PitfallsOctober 18, 2017"

  • "Protecting your IPAugust 9, 2017"

  • "Medical Marijuana & Employment: The Do’s and Don’tsJune 28, 2017"

  • "Medical Marijuana & Employment: The Do’s and Don’tsApril 10, 2017"

Client Testimonials
  • "Melinda Garcia came very highly recommended by two colleagues who raved about her expertise and assertiveness. She and her team are extremely responsive and help us navigate the legal challenges of our consulting business. We're thrilled to have Melinda on our side!"

  • "Melinda Garcia was wonderful to work with. She is an outstanding listener and has a great memory for details and personal information.... which makes one feel very comfortable and welcome. I would highly recommend her to anyone not only because of her outstanding abilities but because of the compassion she eludes in dealing with an individual's issues/concerns."

  • "Highly recommend! I was in need of urgent help with an employment matter and Melinda Garcia came through for me the same day. She fit me in for a consultation within hours of my call and read my documents prior to our meeting. She was thorough, attentive to my needs, knowledgeable, professional and above all very comforting."

  • "Melinda Garcia provided me excellent advice in resolving an employment agreement related to an acquisition of the company I worked for. She is very knowledgeable, asked me what I wanted to achieve with her services, provided excellent service to achieve those goals, and was very cognizant of fees. I recommend her for employment related services."

  • "Melinda Garcia provided excellent guidance with an employment/compensation case. Her knowledge of employment law, and strong negotiation skills, brought the case to a successful conclusion."

  • "Melinda Garcia has done an excellent job assisting us as we established our small business. From incorporation to contract negotiations, Melinda Garcia and her staff were outstanding"