Ellis v. DotNext Inc. et al

Filing 31

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman finding as moot 6 Motion to Dismiss; granting 21 Motion to Amend/Correct ; 7/19/2010 is required to E-FILE the amended document (bzsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/2/2010)

Ellis v. DotNext Inc. et al

Doc. 31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ) ) ) ) Plaintiff(s), ) ) v. ) ) ) DOTNEXT INC.; LEAPFISH INC.;) BEHNAM BEHROUZI; RUSSELL ) SAFAR; DOES 1-10 inclusive, ) ) ) Defendant(s). ) ) MAXINE ELLIS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No. C10-1599

BZ

ORDER RESOLVING PLEADING MOTIONS

Plaintiff having voluntarily dismissed Leapfish, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Leapfish's motion to dismiss (Docket No. 6) is DENIED AS MOOT and that the hearing on that motion presently scheduled for July 21, 2010 is VACATED. Having received statements of non-opposition from defendants DotNext and Behrouzi, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to file a supplemental complaint (Docket No. 21) is GRANTED. Defendants shall answer by July 19, 2010.

The impact of the supplemental complaint on defendant 1
Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Safar's motion to dismiss (Docket No. 7) and the impact of the DotNext's answer and amended counterclaim (Docket No. 29) on plaintiff's motion to dismiss (Docket No. 19), is unclear. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that by July 9, 2010 the parties shall meet and confer and thereafter file a joint writing clarifying which motions still need Court resolution. The parties shall

also discuss whether they are not better off using their resources in an early settlement effort, as opposed to a pleading war. The Court is prepared to schedule an early ADR

at the parties request. Dated: July 2, 2010 Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge
G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\ELLIS V. DOXNEXT\ORDER 7.2.2010.wpd

2