Del. Riverkeeper Network v. Sunoco Pipeline L.P.

Full title: DELAWARE RIVERKEEPER NETWORK, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SUNOCO PIPELINE L.P.…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Apr 16, 2020

Civ. No. 18-2447 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 16, 2020)

Opinion

Civ. No. 18-2447

04-16-2020

DELAWARE RIVERKEEPER NETWORK, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SUNOCO PIPELINE L.P., Defendant.

Paul S. Diamond, J.

JUDGMENT

AND NOW, this 16th day of April, 2020, for the reasons provided in my Memorandum Opinion (Doc. No. 58), it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 45) is GRANTED;

2. Counts 1 and 2 of Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 12) are DISMISSED with prejudice. Insofar as the Amended Complaint includes any state law claim—and it is by no means clear that it does—I decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over it. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); see Born v. Aberdeen Police Dep't, 397 F. App'x 801, 802 (3d Cir. 2010);

3. JUDGMENT is ENTERED in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs;

4. Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 47) is DENIED;

5. Defendant's Motion in limine (Doc. No. 46) is DENIED as moot; and

6. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Paul S . Diamond

Paul S. Diamond, J.