United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc.
E1002336
United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. is the landmark federal civil case arising from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, in which the U.S. government sought penalties and damages from BP for one of the largest environmental disasters in American history.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T12783487 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. Context triple: [MC252, legalCase, United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc.]
-
A.
Kivalina v. ExxonMobil
Kivalina v. ExxonMobil is a landmark U.S. climate change lawsuit in which an Alaskan village sued major energy companies for damages allegedly caused by global warming and resulting coastal erosion.
-
B.
US Supreme Court case Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker is a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly limited punitive damages awarded against Exxon for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, shaping modern maritime and punitive damages law.
-
C.
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. is a landmark 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort Statute in human rights lawsuits against corporations for conduct occurring abroad.
-
D.
Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit
The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
-
E.
Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the authority of non-Article III bankruptcy courts and reshaped the constitutional framework for federal bankruptcy adjudication.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. Target entity description: United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. is the landmark federal civil case arising from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, in which the U.S. government sought penalties and damages from BP for one of the largest environmental disasters in American history.
-
A.
Kivalina v. ExxonMobil
Kivalina v. ExxonMobil is a landmark U.S. climate change lawsuit in which an Alaskan village sued major energy companies for damages allegedly caused by global warming and resulting coastal erosion.
-
B.
US Supreme Court case Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker is a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly limited punitive damages awarded against Exxon for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, shaping modern maritime and punitive damages law.
-
C.
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. is a landmark 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort Statute in human rights lawsuits against corporations for conduct occurring abroad.
-
D.
Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit
The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
-
E.
Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the authority of non-Article III bankruptcy courts and reshaped the constitutional framework for federal bankruptcy adjudication.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Clean Water Act enforcement case
ⓘ
environmental enforcement action ⓘ federal civil case ⓘ |
| arisesFromDate | 2010-04-20 ⓘ |
| arisesFromEvent |
Deepwater Horizon oil spill
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Macondo well blowout ⓘ |
| arisesFromLocation | Gulf of Mexico NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| civilPenaltyAmount | 5530000000 USD ⓘ |
| civilPenaltyStatute | Clean Water Act section 311 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| consolidatedIn | multidistrict litigation 2179 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| court | United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| filedByAgency | United States Department of Justice NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| filedOnBehalfOf |
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
U.S. Department of the Interior NERFINISHED ⓘ United States Coast Guard NERFINISHED ⓘ United States Environmental Protection Agency NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| finding |
BP engaged in willful misconduct
ⓘ
BP was 67 percent at fault for the spill NERFINISHED ⓘ BP was grossly negligent ⓘ |
| hasDefendant |
BP America Production Company
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
BP Exploration & Production Inc. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasPlaintiff | United States of America NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| includes | state settlements with Gulf Coast states ⓘ |
| involves |
assessment of per-barrel Clean Water Act penalties
ⓘ
civil liability for offshore oil pollution ⓘ |
| judge | Carl J. Barbier NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalBasis |
Clean Water Act
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Oil Pollution Act of 1990 NERFINISHED ⓘ civil maritime law ⓘ |
| naturalResourceDamagesAmount | 8100000000 USD ⓘ |
| naturalResourceDamagesPaymentPeriod | 15 years ⓘ |
| phase |
liability phase
ⓘ
penalty phase ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Macondo Prospect NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| restorationProgram |
Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council projects
ⓘ
Natural Resource Damage Assessment restoration projects ⓘ |
| seeks |
civil penalties
ⓘ
injunctive relief ⓘ natural resource damages ⓘ removal costs ⓘ |
| settlementApprovedBy | Judge Carl J. Barbier NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| settlementDate | 2016-04-04 ⓘ |
| settlementType | consent decree ⓘ |
| significance |
landmark case in U.S. environmental law
ⓘ
largest environmental settlement in U.S. history ⓘ |
| totalSettlementPackageApprox | 20000000000 USD ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. Description of subject: United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. is the landmark federal civil case arising from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, in which the U.S. government sought penalties and damages from BP for one of the largest environmental disasters in American history.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.