Del-Ray Battery Co. v. Douglas Battery Co., 635 F.3d 725

Appellants Del-Ray Battery Co. and Golden Eagle Battery, Inc. are battery recyclers sued in Texas state court by Defendants Douglas Battery Co. and Interstate Battery Systems of America, Inc. for contribution to cleanup costs under the Texas SWDA.
The Tecula, Texas site was a Superfund site; EPA paid about $4 million for cleanup; TCEQ identified defendants as potentially responsible parties and ordered remedial investigations.
Plaintiffs argued the SREA shielding CERCLA recyclers from liability also exempts them from SWDA liability and allows recovery of defense costs.
State court granted partial summary judgment on cost-recovery elements but later non-suited the case; Defendants dismissed with no damages awarded.
Plaintiffs filed a federal action seeking (i) SREA-based declaratory relief and (ii) fees under the SREA, asserting federal-question jurisdiction and supplemental jurisdiction for related declaratory claims.
district court dismissed the claims (including the fee claim) and dismissed the constitutional declaratory claim; this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the SREA applies to SWDA claims.	SREA shields recyclers from CERCLA liability and awards defense fees, thus exempts SWDA claims.	SREA limits apply to CERCLA actions only; SWDA claims remain under state law.	SREA does not apply to SWDA; it applies only to CERCLA claims.
Whether the district court had jurisdiction to hear the declaratory claims.	Claims arise under federal law via SREA and are related to the fee claim.	Rooker-Feldman and lack of federal-question jurisdiction bar the claims; but supplemental jurisdiction may apply.	District court had subject-matter jurisdiction except for the fourth claim; other claims fall within supplemental jurisdiction.
Whether CERCLA preempts SWDA or otherwise affects SWDA liability.	CERCLA provisions and SREA preempt or modify SWDA liability.	CERCLA does not preempt state-law liability; SREA does not apply to SWDA; state law governs.	CERCLA does not preempt SWDA; SREA does not apply to SWDA claims.
Whether dismissal of the fee claim was proper on failure to state a claim or jurisdictional grounds.	SREA authorizes recovery of fees; district court erred in dismissing.	SREA exempts only CERCLA liability and does not authorize SWDA-related fees.	SREA does not authorize SWDA-related fees; the fee claim fails.

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280 (Supreme Court 2005) (Rooker-Feldman and jurisdictional principles applied to review of state judgments)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court 2007) (pleading standard: plausible claims required)
Cooper Indus., Inc. v. Aviall Servs., Inc., 543 U.S. 157 (Supreme Court 2004) (CERCLA saving clauses preserve state-law claims)
MSOF Corp. v. Exxon Corp., 295 F.3d 485 (5th Cir. 2002) (CERCLA saving clauses preserve state-law rights)
In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litig., 495 F.3d 191 (5th Cir. 2007) (standing and pleading standards in mass-tort context)
Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (Supreme Court 1994) (jurisdictional rules and limits of federal courts)
Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (Supreme Court 2006) (supplemental jurisdiction considerations after cleanup of federal-claim dismissal)
New Orleans & Gulf Coast Ry. Co. v. Barrois, 533 F.3d 321 (5th Cir. 2008) (federal-question jurisdiction principles in declaratory actions)
Pub. Serv. Comm'n of Utah v. Wycoff Co., 344 U.S. 237 (1952) (basis for federal-question jurisdiction when defense mirrors threatened state action)