Takiguchi et al v. MRI International, Inc. et al
Filing
160
ORDER Denying as moot 102 and 105 Defendants' Motions to Dismiss 86 Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 06/18/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
SHIGE TAKIGUCHI, FUMI NONAKA,
)
MITSUAKI TAKITA, KAORUKO KOIZUMI, )
TATSURO SAKAI, SHIZUKO ISHIMORI, )
YOKO HATANO, YUKO NAKAMURA,
)
HIDEHITO MIURA, YOSHIKO TAZAKI, )
MASAAKI MORIYA, HATSUNE HATANO, )
SATORU MORIYA, HIDENAO TAKAMA,
)
SHIGERU KURISU, SAKA ONO,
)
KAZUHIRO MATSUMOTO, KAYA
)
HATANAKA, HIROKA YAMAJIRI,
)
KIYOHARU YAMAMOTO, JUNKO
)
YAMAMOTO, KOICHI INOUE, AKIKO
)
NARUSE, TOSHIMASA NOMURA, and
)
RITSU YURIKUSA, Individually and )
on Behalf of All Others Similarly )
Situated,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
MRI INTERNATIONAL, INC., EDWIN J )
FUJINAGA, JUNZO SUZUKI, PAUL
)
MUSASHI SUZUKI, LVT, INC., dba
)
STERLING ESCROW, and DOES 1-500, )
)
Defendants.
)
_________________________________ )
2:13-cv-01183-JAD-VCF
ORDER
24
On October 4, 2013, defendants Edwin Fujinaga and MRI
25
International, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second
26
amended complaint (#102).
On October 16, 2013, defendants Junzo
27
Suzuki and Paul Musashi Suzuki also filed a motion to dismiss the
28
1
1
second amended complaint (#105).
2
plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint.
Plaintiffs filed
3
their third amended complaint on June 6, 2014.
The amended
4
complaint supersedes plaintiffs’ prior complaints.
5
v. Chertoff, 656 F.3d 851, 857 (9th Cir. 2011).
6
motions to dismiss the second amended complaint (#102, #105) are
7
DENIED AS MOOT.
On May 6, 2014, the court granted
8
Accordingly, the
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
Valadez-Lopez
DATED: This 18th day of June, 2014.
10
11
____________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?