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)

Download PDF
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?