Richtek Technology Corporation et al v. uPI Semiconductor Corporation et al
Filing
195
ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS. Signed by Judge Alsup on December 17, 2010. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/17/2010)
<![CDATA[
Richtek Technology Corporation et al v. uPI Semiconductor Corporation et al
Doc. 195
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and RICHTEK USA, INC., Plaintiffs, v. UPI SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. / No. C 09-05659 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United States District Court
11
For the Northern District of California
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
On November 12, 2010, a group of seventeen defendants represented by Haynes and Boone, LLP filed four separate motions to dismiss. The motions were made on the following bases: (1) lack of personal jurisdiction; (2) lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, or in the alternative, forum non conveniens; (3) improper venue pursuant to a forum selection agreement; and (4) lack of standing. Two other defendants represented by two other law firms have joined the latter three motions. All four motions have been fully briefed and are set for hearing on December 23, 2010. Filing the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction as a separate motion was acceptable, but the other three motions should have been consolidated into a single pleading. The exact same group of seventeen defendants submitted each motion, and a single law firm represents all of these movants. Under these circumstances, the submission of four separate
Dockets.Justia.com
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
motions to dismiss appears to be a scheme for circumnavigating the page limits imposed by the Civil Local Rules. Movants are directed to file a summary of the latter three motions to dismiss no later than NOON ON DECEMBER 21, 2010. This summary may not exceed ten pages and may not contain new material but must provide a synopsis of the voluminous briefing filed on these three motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 17, 2010.
WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
United States District Court
11
For the Northern District of California
12 13 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?
