Almeida v. Google, Inc.

Filing 39

MOTION to Dismiss filed by Google, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 4/2/2010 09:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Silbert, David) (Filed on 2/22/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP CHRISTA M. ANDERSON - #184325 DAVID J. SILBERT - #173128 REBEKAH PUNAK - #248588 710 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

DAVID ALMEIDA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants.

Case No. C 08-02088 RMW [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT GOOGLE INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS Date: Time: Dept: Judge: April 2, 2010 9:00 a.m. 6 Hon. Ronald M. Whyte April 22, 2008

Date Comp. Filed: Trial Date: None set.

468070.01

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT GOOGLE INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. C 08-02088 RMW

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Defendant Google Inc. has filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice all claims against it in this action. Having carefully considered the papers on this motion and the arguments by the parties, Google's motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff David Almeida lacked standing to pursue his claims at the time he filed his complaint. Under controlling Ninth Circuit law the Court must dismiss this action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1); Lierboe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 350 F.3d 1018, 1023 (9th Cir. 2003). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

HONORABLE RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

1
468070.01

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT GOOGLE INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. C 08-02088 RMW