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)

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