Dean King v. IM Global et al

Filing 94

AMENDED JUDGMENT RE DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES PURSUANT TO F.R.CIV. P. RULE 56 by Judge S. James Otero: Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and that Plaintiffs Complaint in this action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, that Plaintiff shall take nothing, and that Defendants shall have judgment against Plaintiff on all claims. (lc)

Download PDF
1 January 25, 2017 2 VC P 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 No. 15-cv-09646-SJO-AGRx DEAN KING, 8 Plaintiff, 9 10 v. IM GLOBAL, INDEPENDENT FILM 11 PRODUCTIONS LIMITED dba 12 INDEPENDENT FILM COMPANY, and LUC ROEG, 13 Defendants. 14 AMENDED JUDGMENT RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES PURSUANT TO F.R.CIV. P. RULE 56 Hearing Date: January 30, 2017 Time: 10 a.m. Crtrm: 10C – The Honorable Judge S. James Otero 15 16 17 18 19 20 This Motion for Summary Judgment Or, In the Alternative, Summary 21 Adjudication of Issues of Defendants Independent Film Productions Limited and Luc 22 Roeg (“Defendants”) came on regularly for hearing in the courtroom of the 23 Honorable S. James Otero on October 3, 2016. The Court took the Motion under 24 submission. 25 After due consideration, and the Court having concluded that there was no 26 genuine issue of material fact: 27 /// 28 /// Case No. 15-cv-09646-SJO-AGRx. AMENDED JUDGMENT 1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Defendants’ 2 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and that Plaintiff’s Complaint in this 3 action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, that Plaintiff shall take 4 nothing, and that Defendants shall have judgment against Plaintiff on all claims.1 5 6 Dated: January 25 , 2017 S. James Otero, Judge United States District Court 7 8   9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 Pursuant to the Court’s Order herewith granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend or 26 Correct Judgment, the Court hereby strikes the following language included in this Court’s original Judgment entered on November 9, 2016 (Doc. No. 75): 27 “…Defendants shall recover their costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred herein in an amount to be determined.” Accordingly, the Court omits that language 28 from the instant Amended Judgment. Case No. 15-cv-09646-SJO-AGRx AMENDED JUDGMENT

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?