McKinney v. Google, Inc. et al
Filing
88
RESPONSE (re 83 MOTION to Dismiss SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT ) Plaintiffs Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint filed byMary McKinney. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss)(Avila, Sara) (Filed on 4/4/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN JOSE DIVISION
10
Milstein Adelman, LLP
2800 Donald Douglas Loop North
Santa Monica, California 90405
11
MARY MCKINNEY, Individually and on
behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
12
CASE NO: 5:10-cv-01177-JW
CLASS ACTION
Plaintiff,
13
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
v.
14
15
16
GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware Corporation;
Date:
April 25, 2011
HTC CORP., a Delaware Corporation; and T- Time:
9:00 A.M.
MOBILE USA, INC., a Delaware Corporation. Courtroom: 8
Judge:
Hon. James Ware
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
21
22
Having considered Defendants Google, Inc. and HTC Corp.’s Motion to dismiss, and good
cause appearing, the Court hereby DENIES the motion.
23
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26
Dated: ________________
_____________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
THE HONORABLE JAMES S. WARE
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING GOOGLE’S
MOTION TO DISMISS
Error! Unknown document property name.
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?