U.S. Wholesale Outlet & Distribution, Inc. v. Innovation Ventures, LLC et al

Filing 618

JUDGMENT by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: Consistent with the jurys verdict (Dkt. 517, 518), the Courts Order re: Plaintiffs Motion For Renewed Judgment As Matter of Law, or in the alternative, Motion for a New Trial (Dkt. No. 601), and the Courts Orde r re: Adjudication of Plaintiffs Section 2(d) claim (Dkt. 599, 603), judgment is hereby entered: (1) against Plaintiffs and in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs first Section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a) cause of action; ( 2) against Plaintiffs and in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs second Section 2(d) of the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a) cause of action; and (3) against Plaintiffs and in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs fourth California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. &Prof. Code § 17200 cause of action. IT IS SO ORDERED. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (shb)

Case 2:18-cv-01077-CBM-E Document 618 Filed 08/05/21 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:30528

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

U.S. Wholesale Outlet & Distribution,
Inc., et al.,
Plaintiffs,

Case No.: CV 18-1077 CBM (Ex)
JUDGMENT

vs.

JS-6

Living Essentials, LLC, et al.l,
Defendants.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Consistent with the jury’s verdict (Dkt. 517, 518), the Court’s Order re:
Plaintiffs’ Motion For Renewed Judgment As Matter of Law, or in the alternative,
Motion for a New Trial (Dkt. No. 601), and the Court’s Order re: Adjudication of
Plaintiffs’ Section 2(d) claim (Dkt. 599, 603), judgment is hereby entered:
(1)

25
26
27

(2)

against Plaintiffs and in favor of Defendants on
Plaintiffs’ first Section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a) cause of action;
against Plaintiffs and in favor of Defendants on
Plaintiffs’ second Section 2(d) of the RobinsonPatman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a) cause of action; and

28
1

Case 2:18-cv-01077-CBM-E Document 618 Filed 08/05/21 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:30529

1
2

(3)

against Plaintiffs and in favor of Defendants on
Plaintiffs’ fourth California Unfair Competition Law,
Cal. Bus. &Prof. Code § 17200 cause of action.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6

DATED: August 5, 2021

7
8
9

CONSUELO B. MARSHALL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2