Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc.
Filing
165
ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting #113 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/18/2020)
Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 165 Filed 11/18/20 Page 1 of 2
1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
EPIC GAMES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
6
7
8
APPLE INC.,
Defendant.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
13
14
Re: Dkt. No. 113
APPLE INC.,
Counterclaimant,
11
12
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
ON THE PLEADINGS
v.
9
10
Case No. 4:20-cv-05640-YGR
v.
EPIC GAMES, INC.,
Counter-Defendant.
15
16
On November 10, 2020, the Court heard oral argument on plaintiff and counter-defendant
17
Epic Games, Inc.’s (“Epic Games”) motion for judgment on the pleadings, which was fully
18
briefed. (Dkt. Nos. 113, 129, 135.) For the reasons stated on the record, and confirmed herein,
19
having carefully considered the briefing and arguments submitted in this matter, the Court
20
GRANTS Epic Games’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. See JRS Products, Inc. v.
21
Matsushita Electr. Corp. of Am., 115 Cal.App.4th 168, 183 (2004) (“[W]rongful or not, the
22
termination [of the contract] is not ‘independent’ of [defendant’s] interference with [plaintiff’s]
23
interest. . . . [A] breach of contract claim cannot be transmuted into tort liability by claiming that
24
the breach interfered with the promisee’s business.”); Plummer v. Day/Eisenberg, LLP, 184
25
Cal.App.4th 38, 45 (2010) (“Neither legal title nor absolute ownership of the property is
26
necessary. . . . A party need only allege it is ‘entitled to immediate possession at the time of
27
conversion. . . .’ . . . However, a mere contractual right of payment, without more, will not
28
suffice.”).
Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 165 Filed 11/18/20 Page 2 of 2
1
Accordingly, defendant and counterclaimant Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) counterclaims for
2
Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage (Count IV) and Conversion (Count
3
V) are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and Apple’s requests for punitive damages are also
4
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
Dated: November 18, 2020
7
8
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
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?