Technology & Intellectual Property Strategies Group PC v. Fthenakis et al

Filing 54

ORDER by Judge Maria-Elena James denying 49 Motion for Sanctions (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2011)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

Northern District of California

6
7

TECHNOLOGY & INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY STRATEGIES GROUP PC,

8
Plaintiff,
9

No. C 11-2373 MEJ
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

v.
Dkt. No. 49
BASIL P. FTHENAKIS, et al.,

11

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

13

On October 26, 2011, Plaintiff Technology & Intellectual Property Strategies Group PC filed

14 a Motion for Sanctions, with a noticed hearing date of December 1, 2011. Dkt. No. 49. Pursuant to
15 Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds this matter suitable for disposition without oral argument and
16 hereby VACATES the December 1 hearing. In its motion, Plaintiff directs the Court’s attention to
17 five statements Defendant Basil Fthenakis made in a declaration that it contends are false. Plaintiff
18 argues that Defendant should be sanctioned for this alleged perjury with the dismissal with prejudice
19 of his counterclaim. However, upon review of Plaintiff’s motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff has
20 not established any perjury; instead, it has shown that questions of fact exist regarding the
21 termination form at issue in this case. Plaintiff’s motion does not conclusively resolve these
22 questions, which are properly resolved in the context of a summary judgment motion or trial.
23 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26 Dated: October 31, 2011
27
28

_______________________________
Maria-Elena James
Chief United States Magistrate Judge