Robinson v. Open Top Sightseeing San Francisco, LLC
Filing
38
ORDER by Judge Hamilton denying 32 Motion to Dismiss (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/23/2014)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6
7
HAROLD ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
8
9
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
DISMISS
OPEN TOP SIGHTSEEING
SAN FRANCISCO, LLC,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
v.
No. C 14-0852 PJH
12
Defendant.
_______________________________/
13
14
Defendant’s motion to dismiss came on for hearing before this court on July 23,
15
2014. Plaintiff Harold Robinson (“plaintiff”) appeared through his counsel, Joel Young.
16
Defendant Open Top Sightseeing San Francisco, LLC (“defendant”) appeared through its
17
counsel, Michael Purcell. Having read the papers filed in conjunction with the motion and
18
carefully considered the arguments and relevant legal authority, and good cause
19
appearing, the court hereby DENIES defendant’s motion to dismiss for the reasons stated
20
at the hearing.
21
While the court finds that the majority of plaintiff’s allegations are not sufficient to
22
meet the “interstate commerce” element of his first cause of action, the allegation that
23
defendant “sells tour packages to out-of-state individuals and/or groups” is arguably
24
sufficient to meet the “interstate commerce” element. The court also finds that plaintiff’s
25
allegations are sufficient to allege willfulness. Accordingly, defendant’s motion is DENIED.
26
However, the court notes that neither issue is foreclosed from further litigation on the
27
merits, because while plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient for pleading purposes, they will
28
need to be supported by actual evidence after discovery.
1
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 23, 2014
______________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
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?