Summa Resource Holdings LLC v. Carbon Energy Limited

Filing 25

ORDER Regarding Supplemental Briefing; Continuing Hearing. Set/Reset Deadlines as to 16 MOTION to Dismiss . Motion Hearing set for 3/28/2016 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Thelton E. Henderson. Signed by Hon. Thelton E. Henderson on 02/16/16. (tehlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2016)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
5

SUMMA RESOURCE HOLDINGS
LLC,

Case No. 15-cv-05334-TEH

Plaintiff,
6

v.
7
8

CARBON ENERGY LIMITED,

ORDER REGARDING
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING;
CONTINUING HEARING

Defendant.
9

On December 18, 2015, Defendant Carbon Energy Limited (“Carbon”) filed

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Motions to Dismiss and Strike. Docket No. 16. Plaintiff Summa Resource Holdings, LLC

12

(“Summa”) timely opposed the motions. Docket No. 17. The matter is currently set for

13

oral argument on February 22, 2016.

14

Throughout its motions, Carbon repeatedly argues that Queensland law governs the

15

share sale agreement (“Agreement”) entered into by the parties, and therefore applies to all

16

claims arising from the Agreement. Docket No. 16 at 4, 8, 11, 13, 14-16, 21. In

17

opposition, Summa requests that if the Court finds a choice of law determination to be

18

necessary at this stage of the proceedings, the Court order the parties to submit

19

supplemental briefs on the issue. Docket No. 17 at 9 n.7.

20

Having considered the parties’ written arguments, the Court now finds that a choice

21

of law determination may be necessary to rule on one or more aspects of Carbon’s

22

motions. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

23

1. Each party shall file a supplemental brief of no more than fifteen pages by

24

March 1, 2016. The brief shall address: (1) the scope of the Agreement’s

25

choice of law provision, including whether the provision reaches tort claims;

26

(2) whether Queensland and California law direct different outcomes on

27

Carbon’s motion to dismiss each of Summa’s eight claims; and (3) if the

28

Court should find that Queensland law governs any claim, why the Court

1

should not decline to exercise its jurisdiction over this matter under the

2

doctrine of forum non conveniens.

3

2. Each party may file an opposition brief of no more than fifteen pages by

4

March 15, 2016. Reply briefing is not permitted and will not be considered

5

by the Court.

6

3. The motion hearing previously set for February 22, 2016 is continued to

7

March 28, 2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco.

8

On that date, the parties shall come prepared to argue both the issues raised

9

in Carbon’s motions and the issues raised in the supplemental choice of law

10

briefing.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15

Dated: 02/16/16

_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2