Doe I et al v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al
Filing
67
MOTION to Dismiss Corrected First Amended Complaint filed by John Chambers, Owen Chan, Fredy Cheung, Cisco Systems, Inc., Thomas Lam. Motion Hearing set for 1/17/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Jeremy Fogel. Responses due by 10/12/2011. Replies due by 11/14/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sullivan, Kathleen) (Filed on 9/23/2011)
<![CDATA[
1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Kathleen M. Sullivan (CA Bar No. 242261)
kathleensullivan@quinnemanuel.com
555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor
Redwood City, California 94065
Telephone:
(650) 801-5000
Facsimile:
(650) 801-5100
Faith E. Gay (pro hac vice)
faithgay@quinnemanuel.com
Isaac Nesser (pro hac vice)
isaacnesser@quinnemanuel.com
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, New York 10010
(212) 849-7000
Telephone:
Facsimile:
(212) 849-7100
Attorneys for the Defendants
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
Doe I, Doe II, Ivy He, Doe III, Doe IV, Doe V,
Doe VI, Roe VII, Charles Lee, Roe VIII, Liu
Guifu, and those individuals similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Cisco Systems, Inc., John Chambers, Thomas
Lam, Owen Chan, Fredy Cheung, and Does 1100,
Defendants.
Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-JF
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Case No. 5:11-cv-2449-JF
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT
1
Defendants Cisco Systems, Inc., John Chambers, Thomas Lam, Owen Chan, and Fredy
Cheung have moved the Court, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)
for an order dismissing Plaintiffs’ Corrected First Amended Complaint in its entirety.
Having considered all the papers filed by the parties in connection with Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss, the parties’ arguments at the hearing on this matter, and other materials of
which the Court may properly take judicial notice, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the Corrected First
Amended Complaint in its entirety as against all Defendants.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
United States District Court Judge
Case No. 5:11-cv-2449-JF
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT
]]>
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?
