UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 19, 2012
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC.; EAST YARD COMMUNTIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE; AND COALITION FOR A SAFE ENVIRONMENT; PLAINTIFFS,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; RAY LAHOOD; FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION; JEFFREY F. PANIATI; AND CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; DEFENDANTS. ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY; REAL PARTY IN INTEREST.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable John A. Kronstadt United States District Court
SHARON RUBALCAVA (SBN: 067363) email@example.com SHIRAZ D. TANGRI (SBN: 203037) firstname.lastname@example.org MARISA BLACKSHIRE (SBN: 250156) email@example.com ALSTON & BIRD LLP 333 South Hope Street, 16th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: 213-576-1000 / Facsimile: (213) 576-1100 Attorneys for Real Party in Interest ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
NOTE: CHANGES MADE BY THE COURT
Action Filed: November 4, 2009 Hearing Date: September 23, 2011
[JOINTLY SUBMITTED BY DEFENDANTS AND REAL PARTY IN INTEREST]
This action came on for hearing before the Court, on September 23, 2011, the Hon. John A. Kronstadt, District Judge Presiding, on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. Shiraz D. Tangri, Marisa E. Blackshire and Sharon Rubalcava of Alston & Bird LLP appeared for Real Party In Interest Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority ("ACTA"), Norman L. Rave, Jr. of the United States Department of Justice appeared on behalf of United States Department of Transportation, Ray LaHood, Federal Highway Administration, and Victor Mendez (collectively, the "Federal Defendants"), and Judith A. Carlson appeared on behalf of the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") (ACTA, the Federal Defendants and Caltrans are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants"). Adriano Martinez and Robert E. Yuhnke appeared on behalf of plaintiffs Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice and the Coalition For A Safe Environment (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"). The administrative record and arguments presented having been fully considered, the issues having been duly heard and a decision having been duly rendered, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:
After considering the administrative record and arguments, both oral and documentary, presented in connection with these cross-motions and introduced at the hearing thereon, being fully advised in the premises and good cause appearing therefore, the Court hereby GRANTS summary judgment in favor of Defendants and DENIES the parallel motions of Plaintiffs on the grounds set forth in the Court's Minute Order filed June 29, 2012 [Docket No. 119].
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendants on all of Plaintiffs' claims and requests for relief.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.