Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle International Corporation

Filing 576

ORDER defendant/counter-claimants' motion to dismiss claims two through six of plaintiff's second amended complaint ECF No. 400 is DENIED without prejudice; plaintiff's motion for a hearing on defendant/counterclaimants' motion ECF No. 404 is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 09/12/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

RIMINI STREET, INC. a Nevada Corporation;

10

Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:14-cv-1699-LRH-CWH

11
v.
12
13
14
15
16
17

ORDER
ORACLE INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION, a California Corporation,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
ORACLE AMERICA, INC., a Delaware
Corporation; and ORACLE
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,

18

Plaintiff,

19
v.

20
21

RIMINI STREET, INC.; and SETH RAVIN, an
individual,

22

Counter-defendants.

23
Before the court is defendant and counter-claimants Oracle International Corporation and

24
25

Oracle America, Inc.’s (collectively “Oracle”) motion to dismiss claims two through six of

26

plaintiff Rimini Street, Inc.’s (“Rimini Street”) second amended complaint (ECF No. 367).

27

ECF No. 400.

28

///
1

1

After the filing of the Oracle’s motion, Rimini Street filed a motion for leave to file a

2

third amended complaint (ECF No. 465) which was granted by the court (ECF No. 486).

3

Thereafter, on May 2, 2017, Rimini Street filed its third and final amended complaint.

4

ECF No. 487. The filing of Rimini Street’s third amended complaint supersedes the second

5

amended complaint in its entirety. As such, Oracle’s motion to dismiss claims two through six of

6

the second amended complaint is now moot. Further, Oracle has already filed a separate motion

7

to dismiss claims two through eight of Rimini Street’s third amended complaint (ECF No. 505)

8

which is now fully briefed and shall be addressed by the court in a separate order. Therefore, the

9

court shall deny Oracle’s motion to dismiss claims two through six of the second amended

10

complaint.

11
12

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED defendant/counter-claimants’ motion to dismiss claims

13

two through six of plaintiff’s second amended complaint (ECF No. 400) is DENIED without

14

prejudice.

15
16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for a hearing on defendant/counterclaimants’ motion (ECF No. 404) is DENIED as moot.

17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

DATED this 12th day of September, 2017.

19
__________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2