Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Collection

People v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

People v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 

CGC24618323Cal. Super. Ct.1 entry
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
09/23/2024
Complaint
Complaint filed.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a complaint in California Superior Court against Exxon Mobil Corporation (ExxonMobil) alleging that the company “caused or substantially contributed to the deluge of plastic pollution that has harmed and continues to harm California’s environment, wildlife, natural resources, and people.” In addition, the complaint alleged that ExxonMobil deceived Californians “by promising that recycling could and would solve the ever-growing plastic waste crisis.” California’s complaint included allegations that ExxonMobil misled customers regarding greenhouse gas reduction benefits of its “advanced recycling” process. The complaint asserted that claims of significant greenhouse gas reductions through advanced recycling “are based on selective data presentation and problematic assumptions that mislead consumers.” The complaint asserted causes of action for public nuisance under the California Civil Code; for equitable relief for pollution, impairment, and destruction of natural resources under California Government Code Section 12607; for water pollution under the California Fish and Game Code; and for violations of the False Advertising Law, Environmental Marketing Claims Act, and Unfair Competition Law. The complaint requested that the court compel the defendant to abate the public nuisance, including through establishment of an abatement fund and that the court also order ExxonMobil to cease and desist public statements related to its plastic operations, including statements regarding “advanced recycling.” Other relief sought included temporary and permanent equitable relief to prevent pollution, impairment, and destruction of natural resources, as well as civil penalties and disgorgement.

People v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 

3:24-cv-07594N.D. Cal.4 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
03/11/2025
Motion
Motion filed by Exxon Mobil Corporation for stay pending appeal of remand order.
03/11/2025
Appeal
Notice of appeal field by defendant.
02/24/2025
Decision
California's motion to remand granted.
The federal district court remanded to state court the State of California’s lawsuit regarding Exxon Mobil Corporation’s (ExxonMobil’s) contributions to “ever-increasing plastic pollution.” The court denied a motion to remand a similar lawsuit brought by environmental groups. Both the State and the environmental organizations’ lawsuits include allegations that ExxonMobil misled the public about the greenhouse gas reduction benefits of “advanced recycling.” In California’s case, the court rejected ExxonMobil’s contention that federal enclave jurisdiction existed “[s]imply because plastic pollution touches on federal enclaves” along California’s “waterways” and “shorelines,” as well as the contention that there was federal officer jurisdiction based on the U.S. government’s World War II-era contracts with ExxonMobil predecessors to produce rubber. The court also rejected ExxonMobil’s assertion of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction as a basis for federal jurisdiction both because such jurisdiction requires an independent basis for jurisdiction and also because it would be inapplicable.
12/09/2024
Motion
Motion to remand filed by People of the State of California.