E*Healthline.com, Inc. v. Pharmaniaga Berhad et al

Filing 69

ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 9/10/19 GRANTING 65 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

E*HEALTHLINE.COM, INC., a
Delaware corporation,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17

No. 2:18-cv-01069-MCE-EFB

ORDER
v.
PHARMANIAGA BERHAD and
MODERN INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT
HOLDING GROUP COMPANY
LIMITED,
Defendants.

18
19

In this case, Plaintiff E*Healthline.com, Inc., (“EHL”) pursues causes of action

20

against Defendants Pharmaniaga Berhad (“Pharmaniaga”) and Modern Industrial

21

Investment Holding Group Company Limited (“Modern”) (collectively “Defendants”)

22

under state and federal law stemming from Defendants’ alleged misappropriation of

23

trade secrets and confidential information arising out of the parties’ collaboration for a

24

potential joint venture to develop a pharmaceutical facility in Saudi Arabia. The Court

25

previously granted two Motions to Dismiss filed by Pharmaniaga finding a lack of

26

personal jurisdiction, and EHL then filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”).

27

Presently before the Court is Pharmaniaga’s subsequent Motion to Dismiss (ECF

28

No. 65), which EHL timely opposed.
1

1

This Court has twice determined that Pharmaniaga was not subject to either

2

specific or general personal jurisdiction in this district. In the SAC, EHL adds no material

3

allegations changing the Court’s prior conclusions, and those decisions (ECF Nos. 38,

4

63) are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety. Because EHL’s SAC suffers

5

from the same defects as its prior pleadings, Pharmaniaga’s Motion (ECF No. 65) is

6

again GRANTED, this time with prejudice. This case shall remain open as judgment has

7

not been entered against Defendant Modern.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated: September 10, 2019

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