CIECKA et al v. ROSEN et al

Filing 14

ORDERED that the 4 Motion to Remand is DENIED. ORDERED that the 3 Motion to Dismiss Counts I and II against all Defts is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss Count III against Defts Bleefeld and Moss is GRANTED; Defts Bleefeld and Moss are TERMINATED; the motion to dismiss Count III against Defts Rosen and Law firm Rosen, Moss, Snyder & Bleefeld, LLP, is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. Signed by Chief Judge Jerome B. Simandle on 11/5/2012. (drw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

VINCENT J. CIECKA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

HON. JEROME B. SIMANDLE
Civil No. 12-3043 (JBS/AMD)

v.
ORDER
LANCE S. ROSEN, et al.,
Defendants.

This matter having come before the Court upon Plaintiffs’
motion to remand [Docket Item 4] and Defendants’ motion to
dismiss the complaint [Docket Item 3]; the Court having
considered the submissions of the parties in support thereof and
opposition thereto; for the reasons stated in the Opinion of
today’s date; and for good cause shown;
IT IS this

5th

day of

November

, 2012 hereby

ORDERED that the motion to remand is DENIED; and it is
further
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss Counts I and II against
all Defendants is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss Count III against
Defendant Bleefeld and Defendant Moss in their individual
capacities is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendant Bleefeld and Defendant Moss be
terminated from the case as defendants; and it is further
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss Count III against

Defendant Rosen and Defendant law firm Rosen, Moss, Snyder &
Bleefeld, LLP, is DENIED in part (to the extent Plaintiffs allege
Defendants Rosen and the firm of Rosen, Moss, Snyder & Bleefeld,
LLP allegedly tortiously interfered with Plaintiffs’ prospective
economic advantage) and is otherwise GRANTED in part.

s/ Jerome B. Simandle
JEROME B. SIMANDLE
Chief U.S. District Judge

2