CBD v. US Fish and Wildlife Service et al Reference : 3:11-cv-5108-JSW // 3:02-cv-1580-JSW Complaint date : December 28, 2007 Status : Final judgment Place of jurisdiction : United States, San Francisco Plaintiffs types : Environmental NGOs Plaintiffs names : Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) Defendants : Fish and Wildlife Service Lawyers for Health and Environmental Justice : Erin M. Tobin, Michael R. Sherwood, Collette Adkins Giese, Justin Augustine Case nature : Administrative Specificities : Stipulated Settlement Agreement Type(s), Product(s), Active substance(s) : Carbaryl, Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, Malathion, Methomyl Requests : Require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to analyze the impacts of five common pesticides on endangered wildlife across the nation. Name of the Court : United States District Court for the Northern District of California of San Francisco, United States Jurisdiction level : Decision date : July 28, 2014 Decision nature : Positive Decision content : Settlement requiring the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to analyze the impacts of five common pesticides on endangered wildlife across the nation. Legal basis : Court Ruling : Link to the ruling Summary : CBD sued the EPA for failing to consult over the impacts of five common pesticides (carbaryl, chlorpyrifos, diazinon, malathion and methomyl) and other pesticides on endangered California red-legged frogs in Dec. 2007. It had obtained an injunction in 2006 imposing restrictions on pesticide use until the consultation was completed. To date those consultations have not been completed. In 2013 the Center again sued, seeking completion of consultation. In 2013, a federal district court approved a settlement requiring the Service to better protect California red-legged frogs from seven common pesticides known to be highly toxic to amphibians. On July 28, 2014, the Center for Biological Diversity reached a settlement requiring the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to analyze the impacts of these five common pesticides (carbaryl, chlorpyrifos, diazinon, malathion and methomyl) on endangered wildlife across the nation. In this settlement the Fish and Wildlife Service resolved that litigation by agreeing to complete consultation and produce the required “biological opinions” in less than five years. As part of the agreement the agency will consider the pesticides’ impacts not only on red-legged frogs but on all endangered species across the country. The analysis is likely to lead to permanent restrictions on some of the most harmful uses of these highly toxic pesticides. Scientific references : No scientifice reference for this case. Related links : Complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief, Dec. 2007 Saving the California red-legged frog Settlement requiring the Service to better protect California red-legged frogs from seven common pesticides, Nov. 2013 Settlement Will Help Safeguard Nation's Endangered Wildlife From 5 Dangerous Pesticides -