Ferrari et al v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC et al
ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting with leave to amend 54 Motion to Dismiss ; granting with leave to amend 55 Motion to Dismiss. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/10/2016)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
STEVE FERRARI, ET AL.,
Case No. 15-cv-04379-YGR
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE
MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC, ET AL.,
Dkt Nos. 54 and 55
Plaintiffs Steve Ferrari, et al. (“Plaintiffs”) bring the instant putative class action against
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Defendants Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Autobahn, Inc., David Ahlheim, and Sonic Automotive
Inc., alleging claims for: (1) violation of 18 U.S.C. sections 1961 et seq., the Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”); California Business & Professions Code section 17500,
the False Advertising Law (“FAL”); intentional misrepresentation; fraudulent concealment;
negligent misrepresentation; violation of California Business & Professions Code section 17200,
the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”); and negligence. Defendants Autobahn, Inc., David
Ahlheim, and Sonic Automotive Inc. (collectively, “Autobahn”) filed their Motion to Dismiss the
First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 54). Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC separately filed
its Motion to Dismiss to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 55.)
Having carefully considered the papers submitted and the amended pleading in this action,
and for the reasons stated on the record at the May 10, 2016 hearing, the Court hereby GRANTS the
motions WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiffs shall file their Second Amended Complaint
consistent with the Court’s statements on the record no later than May 31, 2016. Defendants shall
respond within 21 days thereafter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 10, 2016
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT 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?