CHONG et al v. 7-ELEVEN, INC.

Filing 38

ORDER THAT 7-ELEVENS MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 18 ) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS SET OUT IN THE ACCOMPANYING MEMORANDUM; MR. CHONGS INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED; 7-ELEVENS MOTION TO STAY ARBITRABLE CLAIMS (DOC. NO. 19 ) IS GRANTED; THE PLAINTIFFS VENDOR NEGOTIATING PRACTICES CLAIMSINCLUDING THEIR CLAIMS CONCERNING 7-ELEVENS PROPRIETARY PRODUCTSARE STAYED PENDING THE RESOLUTION BY ARBITRATION PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15(J), 15(K), AND EXHIBIT J TO THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS; AND THE REMAINDER OF THIS CASE WILL PROCEED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 2/27/19. 2/28/19 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (va, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ANTHONY CHONG et al., Plaintiffs, v. 7-ELEVEN, INC, Defendant. : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-1542 ORDER AND NOW, this 27th day of February, 2019, upon consideration of Defendant 7-Eleven Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 18), Plaintiffs Anthony Chong and MT133123, Inc.’s response thereto (Doc. No. 25), 7-Eleven’s Motion to Stay Arbitrable Claims (Doc. No. 19), the plaintiffs’ response thereto (Doc. No. 24), and the parties’ supplemental briefing on these issues (Doc. Nos. 29, 30, 31), it is ORDERED as follows: 1. 7-Eleven’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 18) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as set out in the accompanying Memorandum; 2. Mr. Chong’s individual claims are DISMISSED; 3. 7-Eleven’s Motion to Stay Arbitrable Claims (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED; 4. The plaintiffs’ vendor negotiating practices claims—including their claims concerning 7Eleven’s proprietary products—are STAYED pending the resolution by arbitration pursuant to Sections 15(j), 15(k), and Exhibit J to the Franchise Agreements; and 5. The remainder of this case will proceed. BY THE COURT: /s/ Gene E.K. Pratter ___________________ GENE E.K. PRATTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?