Jahagirdar v. The Computer Haus NC, Inc. et al

Filing 286

ORDER denying 266 , 269 ; Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr on 11/18/2022. (ams)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:20-cv-33-MOC-WCM
SHAILESH JAHAGIRDAR, et al.,

)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
)
THE COMPUTER HAUS NC, INC.,
)
d/b/a/ CITYMAC, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on two separate Motions for Judgment on the
Pleadings, filed by Defendants Mark Curran, Curran Brothers, LLL, Amber Curran, Brandy
Curran, Troy Curran, Curran Holdings, LLC, Curran Ranch, Green Vault, Inc., Northern Passage,
Inc., Ocean Dance, Ocean Tech, Inc., Salish Sea, LLC, TS Leasing, LLC, The Computer Haus
NC, Inc., and Zephyr Investments, Inc. (Doc. Nos. 266, 269). Having considered the motions, and
otherwise reviewed the pleadings, the Court enters the following Order.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings, (Doc.
Nos. 266, 269), are DENIED for the reasons discussed in Plaintiffs’ Responses and Surreply. See
(Doc. Nos. 275, 276, 284). That is, as Plaintiffs note, the pending motions (1) seek to relitigate
issues that have already been decided in Plaintiffs’ favor on Defendants’ prior motion to dismiss;

-1-

Case 1:20-cv-00033-MOC-WCM Document 286 Filed 11/21/22 Page 1 of 2

(2) are untimely1; and (3) overlook the bases for liability alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint
(“FAC”) and raises challenges that do not dispose of any full cause of action.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed: November 18, 2022

1

The pending motions were filed long after the deadline for dispositive motions. Moreover,
although Defendants note that the trial has been continued to February 2023, the trial was still set
for October 2022 when Defendants filed their motions in August 2022.
2 Additionally, and in any event, the pleading standards on Rule 12(c) and 12(6) motions are
extremely lenient. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007), and Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
-2-

Case 1:20-cv-00033-MOC-WCM Document 286 Filed 11/21/22 Page 2 of 2