The underlying case, Center for Food Safety, Inc. v. Wood Farms, LLC, No. 5:23-CV-399, involves a Clean Water Act civil action brought by the Center for Food Safety against Wood Farms, LLC. The dispute centers on discharges of pollutants and whether Wood Farms violated the terms of its general permit, including Section I.B.3.
Wood Farms has argued that the prohibition on causing or contributing to a water quality violation is an impermissible end-result requirement under San Francisco v. EPA. In that decision, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and held that 33 U.S.C. §1311(b)(1)(C) does not authorize the EPA to include end-result provisions in NPDES permits. Center for Food Safety moved for partial summary judgment on September 23, 2025, but its reply brief did not address Wood Farms's San Francisco v. EPA argument.
The issue surfaced again at oral argument, where Wood Farms suggested that Section I.B.3 of the permit may no longer be valid under the Supreme Court's decision. Magistrate Judge Mitchell J. Katz did not consider the question at the hearing but has now ordered briefing on it, expressly setting aside any purported waiver.
The two questions Judge Katz has posed are pointed: first, whether San Francisco v. EPA renders Section I.B.3 of Wood Farms's permit inoperable such that Wood Farms cannot violate that part of the permit at all; and second, whether the court could impose any remedy or enter judgment against Wood Farms for violating that provision even if liability were found.
The briefing is due with the parties' motions in limine. Attorneys Charles M. Tebbutt and Donald E. Spurrell represent the plaintiff; David L. Cook and Nicholas Roberts represent Wood Farms.