Venegas et al v. Wright State University et al

Filing 11

DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING MOTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANTS WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY AND CHRIS TAYLOR (DOC # 5 ) AS TO CLAIMS ONE THROUGH FOUR FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, SUSTAINING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STA TE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED (DOC. # 5 ) AS TO CLAIM FIVE, AND OVERRULING DEFENDANTS' MOTION AS TO CLAIM SIX, SUBJECT TO RENEWAL IF PLAINTIFFS CHOOSE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT; MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT OF PLAI NTIFFS DIEGO VENEGAS AND MARC SODINI (DOC # 7 ) IS OVERRULED, AS PLAINTIFFS HAVE NOT SET FORTH CLAIMS THAT WOULD SURVIVE A MOTION TO DISMISS; PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS TWO THROUGH FIVE ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, AND JUDGMENT SHALL ULTIMATELY ENTER IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS AND AGAINST PLAINTIFFS ON THOSE CLAIMS; PLAINTIFFS MAY FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO CLAIM ONE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS OF THIS ENTRY, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH HEREIN AND THE STRICTURES OF RULE 11 ; IF PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO FILE A VIABLE AMENDED CLAIM ONE, THEN THE COURT WILL DISMISS CLAIM SIX WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REFILING IN A STATE COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 8/21/17. (pb) Modified on 8/21/2017 (pb).