{ Banner Image }






上个月 Puget 音响管理员 Alliance v. APM Terminals Tacoma, LLC, et al.华盛顿州西区美国地方下期双色球预测(C.W.D. Wa。Jan.31,BHS,C17-5016 B.W.D. Wa。Jan.31,2019)驳回了原告Puget 音响管理员 Alliance’s (“Soundkeeper”)针对SSA Terminals,LLC的《清洁水法》公民诉讼(“SSA”)未能满足CWA’s pre-suit notice requirements. The case addressed the novel question of whether the 音响管理员’s “anticipatory”致SSA的诉讼前通知书,在其甚至接管有关物业的运营之前已收到,并满足了CWA的要求’s 60-day pre-suit notice requirement. The court rejected 音响管理员’新颖的理论,并驳回了CWA对SSA的主张。

音响管理员 had brought a citizen suit under the CWA against APM Terminals Tacoma, LLC (“APM”),塔科马港和SSA(港口)的前租客’当前的租户。该案涉嫌APM违反了NPDES许可证,APM在该港口经营了一段时间,但需向该港口租赁’s owner. After APM terminated its lease, SSA entered into an agreement to lease the Port. Sixty days 之前 SSA was scheduled to take control of the premises, however, it received a pre-suit notice letter from 音响管理员, purporting to put it on notice of alleged ongoing violations of the CWA. The letter stated, in relevant part:

Should SSA commence industrial operations and/or discharge stormwater at the the [Port], the [existing] Permit requires SSA to correct the deficiencies identified below. 音响管理员 hereby provides notice of its intent to sue for these violations of the [existing] Permit.

After 音响管理员 commenced its citizen suit under the CWA, SSA moved to dismiss the claim against it on the ground that it could not be in violation of a permit 之前 it became a tenant on the property.

The court agreed and dismissed 音响管理员’对SSA的索赔。下期双色球预测解释说,CWA的目的’诉讼前通知要求是“确保给被告和/或政府执法部门一些诉讼前通知,以便他们有机会解决此问题 之前 提起诉讼。”下期双色球预测裁定“welcom[ing]”物业的SSA“连同投诉副本,” 音响管理员 deprived SSA of its opportunity to correct the alleged violations that were identified in its pre-suit notice letter. Therefore, in the court’s view, the pre-suit notice letter was inadequate, necessitating the dismissal of 音响管理员’s CWA claim.