MOYE v. DEPP et al

Filing 19

DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS - granting #18 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE ASHLEY RUTH MOYÉ, PLAINTIFF v. JOHN CHRISTOPHER DEPP, II, ET AL., DEFENDANTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. 2:13-CV-26-DBH DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS The defendants Depp’s and Mandel’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is GRANTED. The plaintiff has filed no response to the motion and therefore is deemed to have waived objection. See Local Rule 7(b). Moreover, in light of the Complaint’s failure to allege any basis for this court’s personal jurisdiction over the defendant, the Magistrate Judge earlier ordered the plaintiff to state the basis for personal jurisdiction over the defendants. Order to Supplement, Jan. 28, 2013 (ECF No. 4). The plaintiff’s response to that Order showed no basis for jurisdiction. Moyé Decl. (ECF No. 8). Finally, this appears to be another in a series of frivolous lawsuits by this plaintiff against these defendants or other celebrities. Accordingly, I place Ashley Ruth Moyé on NOTICE that filing restrictions “may be in the offing.” Cok v. Family Court of R.I., 985 F.2d 32, 35 (1st Cir. 1993). This represents the “cautionary order” of which Cok speaks. Id. Groundless and inappropriate filings will not be tolerated. SO ORDERED. DATED THIS 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013 /S/D. BROCK HORNBY D. BROCK HORNBY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?