Verragio, Ltd. v. Malakan Diamond Co.

Filing 46

ORDER Denying 37 Motion for Summary Judgment Without Prejudice, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/12/2017. (Defendant Malakan Diamond's summary judgment motion is denied as premature and plaintiff's request for leave to conduct discovery is granted. The hearing re the same set 5/16/2017 is VACATED.)(Gaumnitz, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VERRAGIO, LTD., 12 13 14 No. 1:16-cv-01647-DAD-SKO Plaintiff, v. MALAKAN DIAMOND CO., 15 Defendant. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE (Doc. No. 37) 16 17 MALAKAN DIAMOND CO., Counterclaimant, 18 19 20 21 v. VERRAGIO, LTD., Counter-defendant. 22 23 Plaintiff filed this suit on October 31, 2016, alleging various copyright and trademark 24 infringement claims against defendant Malakan Diamond Co. (Doc. No. 1.) On January 6, 2017, 25 defendant Malakan Diamond filed an answer and counterclaims against plaintiff, and cross- 26 claims against AE Jewelers, Inc., AE Jewelers of Appleton, LLC, Harold Jaffee Jewelry, Inc., and 27 Jensen Jewelers of Idaho, LLC. (Doc. No. 10.) Several of those cross-defendants were 28 subsequently dismissed from the suit by Malakan Diamond on March 29, 2017. (Doc. No. 34.) 1 1 On April 11, 2017, defendant/counterclaimant Malakan Diamond filed a motion for 2 summary judgment with respect to plaintiff’s claims against it. (Doc. No. 37.) This motion for 3 summary judgment was opposed by plaintiff on May 2, 2017, both on the merits and because 4 discovery has not yet commenced in this action. (Doc. No. 41.) Additionally, plaintiff sought 5 leave under Rule 56(d) to conduct discovery relevant to this case prior to the court addressing 6 defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (Id.) 7 Because no discovery has yet been conducted in this action, defendant Malakan 8 Diamond’s summary judgment motion is denied as premature and plaintiff’s request for leave to 9 conduct discovery is granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d). The denial of the motion for summary 10 judgment is without prejudice to defendant/counterclaimant refiling that motion following the 11 exchange of sufficient discovery between the parties. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: May 12, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?