Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations v. Chevron Corp.

On December 14, 2023, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations voluntarily dismissed without prejudice its climate change case against fossil fuel companies. The notice of voluntary dismissal was filed a month and a half after the federal district court for the Northern District of California concluded that the case could be removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act and denied the Federation’s motion to remand.

The federal district court for the Northern District of California “reluctantly” denied a motion to remand the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations’ climate change case against fossil fuel companies. The organization alleged that its members had suffered financial losses due to climate change and stated that it was suing “in a representative capacity on behalf of its members and the west coast fishing community.” The court found that the suit was a state-law equivalent to a damages class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and was therefore removable under the Class Action Fairness Act. The court found that other grounds for removal were without merit. The court asked the parties to address two questions at a case management conference scheduled for December 1, 2023: (1) whether there could be another basis for declining to exercise jurisdiction, “considering either the current complaint or a possible amended complaint,” since, in the court’s view, “the case includes various claims under state law that are quite novel and that the state courts may be better suited to adjudicate,” and (2) whether the court should stay the case pending appeal, which the court said it was “tentatively inclined” to do.

Parties filed joint response to court's notice and request to vacate case management conference.

After the Ninth Circuit’s decisions on jurisdictional issues in the County of San Mateo and City of Oakland cases, the court initially scheduled a case management conference for August 26, 2020 but rescheduled the conference for December 16, 2020 after the parties submitted a joint request to vacate the case management conference given the defendants’ intent to file petitions for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Ninth Circuit’s decisions.

The court signed a joint stipulation staying the proceedings pending final resolution of the appeals in <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/people-state-california-v-bp-plc-oakland/">City of Oakland v. BP p.l.c.</a> and <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/county-san-mateo-v-chevron-corp/">County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp.</a>