Ferrari et al v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC et al

Filing 106

ORDER VACATING AUGUST 30, 2016 HEARING re 81 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6) filed by Speedway Motorsports Inc, 86 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Comp laint filed by David Ahlheim, AUTOBAHN, INC., Joe Cox, SONIC AUTOMOTIVE INC., O. Bruton Smith, 73 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint filed by Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Dietmar Exler. The Court will issue a written decision on the papers. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 8/24/16. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 STEVE FERRARI, ET AL., Case No. 15-cv-04379-YGR Plaintiffs, 6 ORDER VACATING AUGUST 30, 2016 HEARING v. 7 8 MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC, ET AL., Dkt Nos. 73, 81, 86 Defendants. 9 Currently pending before the Court are three motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 Amended Complaint, filed on behalf of: (1) Defendants Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, and Dietmar 12 Exler (Dkt. No. 73); (2) Defendant Speedway Motorsports, Inc. (Dkt. No. 81); and (3) Defendants 13 Autobahn, Inc., David Ahlheim, Joe Cox, O. Bruton Smith, and Sonic Automotive Inc. (Dkt. No. 14 86). 15 The Court finds these motions appropriate for decision without oral argument, as permitted 16 by Civil Local Rule 7-1(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78. See also Lake at Las Vegas 17 Investors Group, Inc. v. Pacific Malibu Dev. Corp., 933 F.2d 724, 729 (9th Cir. 1991). 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Accordingly, the hearing set for August 30, 2016, is VACATED. The Court will issue a written decision on the papers. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 24, 2016 ______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS United States District Court Judge

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?