Fevo, Inc. v. Spinzo Corporation

Filing 24

ORDER on Defendant's 17 Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HRya)

Case 4:22-cv-10030-MFL-DRG ECF No. 24, PageID.356 Filed 01/19/23 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
FEVO, INC.,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 22-cv-10030
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
SPINZO CORPORATION,
Defendant.
__________________________________________________________________/
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF #17)
1.

The Court denies without prejudice Defendant’s motion to dismiss the

First Amended Complaint under Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 12(b)(2) for lack of personal
jurisdiction for the reasons stated on the record during argument on the motion.
2.

The Court denies without prejudice Defendant’s motion to dismiss the

First Amended Complaint under Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 12(b)(5) for insufficient service
of process for the reasons stated on the record during argument on the motion.
3.

The Court terminates without prejudice Defendant’s motion dismiss the

First Amended Complaint under Fed Rule Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted for the reasons stated on the record during
argument on the motion.

Case 4:22-cv-10030-MFL-DRG ECF No. 24, PageID.357 Filed 01/19/23 Page 2 of 3

4.

When announcing its ruling on the motion, the Court directed the

parties to conduct limited jurisdictional discovery on the matters described on the
record during argument on the motion, and to complete such discovery within 60
days. The parties have since notified the Court that they have reached the following
stipulation: (a) Defendant will submit to the specific personal jurisdiction of the
Court for this case and waive its sufficiency-of-service challenge; (b) the
proceedings shall be stayed for a 60-day period to pursue settlement discussions
mediated by Magistrate Judge Grand; (c) if settlement is not achieved within 60 days
of the entry of this order, Defendant will thereafter have 7 days to answer the
Complaint or renew its motion to dismiss under Fed Rule Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6). The
Court accepts the parties’ stipulation and adopts it as its order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: January 19, 2023

–2–

Case 4:22-cv-10030-MFL-DRG ECF No. 24, PageID.358 Filed 01/19/23 Page 3 of 3

SO STIPULATED.

Dated: January 19, 2023

/s/ Stephen J. Rosenfeld
JAMES P. MURAFF (IL 6225693)
STEPHEN J. ROSENFELD (IL 6216769)
NICHOLAS A. KURK (IL 6292133)
TIMOTHY J. LOWE (P68669)
Counsel for Plaintiff Fevo, Inc.
/s/ Joseph E. Richottte
JOSEPH E. RICHOTTE (P70902)
Counsel for Defendant Spinzo Corporation

100172888.v1

–3–