Meras Engineering Inc. et al v. CH2O, Inc.
Filing
26
ORDER CONTINUING MAY 5, 2011 ORAL ARGUMENT TO MAY 26, 2011; DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING. Signed by Judge Beeler on 4/28/11. (lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/28/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
Northern District of California
10
Oakland Division
MERAS ENGINEERING, et al.,
12
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
Plaintiff,
v.
13
CH20, INC.,
No. C 11-00389 LB
ORDER CONTINUING MAY 5, 2011
ORAL ARGUMENT; DIRECTING
PARTIES TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEFING
14
15
Defendant.
_____________________________________/
16
On January 26, 2011, Plaintiffs Meras Engineering, Rich Bernier, and Jay Sughroue filed a
17
complaint against Defendant CH2O, Inc. seeking declaratory relief and asserting a claim for unfair
18
competition. Complaint, ECF No. 1. They filed an amended complaint on February 28, 2011. ECF
19
No. 4. CH2O filed a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint on March 15, 2011. Motion to
20
Dismiss, ECF No. 9. Plaintiffs lodged an opposition to the motion on April 14, 2011 but CH2O did
21
not file a reply. Opposition, ECF No. 16.
22
On February 2, 2011, CH2O filed suit in the Superior Court of Washington in Thurston County
23
against Mr. Bernier and Mr. Sughroue. Peter Petrich Declaration, ECF No. 10 at 2, ¶ 2. Mr. Bernier
24
and Mr. Sughroue subsequently removed the case to the District Court for the Western District of
25
Washington. Id. at ¶ 3. That suit involves substantially the same parties and the same facts involved
26
in the case before this court. See 4/18/11 Order, CH2O v. Bernier, No. C 11-5153 RJB, ECF No. 15
27
at 1-4. After Plaintiffs filed their opposition in this case, Judge Robert Bryan, the presiding judge in
28
the Washington suit, issued an order denying Mr. Bernier and Mr. Sughroue’s motion to dismiss. Id.
C 11-00389 LB
ORDER RE 5/5/11 HEARING AND SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING
1
The order also disposed of a number of issues presented in CH2O’s current motion to dismiss
2
pending before this court. Id.
3
Because the parties have not had the opportunity to comment on that decision in this case, the
4
court ORDERS the parties to submit supplemental briefing that addresses the implications of Judge
5
Bryan’s April 18, 2011 order on CH2O’s current motion to dismiss pending before this court. The
6
supplemental briefing is due by May 12, 2011.
7
8
9
10
May 26, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 28, 2011
_______________________________
LAUREL BEELER
United States Magistrate Judge
12
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
Oral argument on CH2O’s motion to dismiss is HEREBY CONTINUED from May 5, 2011 to
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
C 11-00389 LB
ORDER RE 5/5/11 HEARING AND SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING
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?