Google v. Pacific Webworks

Filing 115

ORDER-granting 73 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. Case Closed. Signed by Judge Bruce S. Jenkins on 4/11/11. (jmr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED T U.S. DISTHICT COUR FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION 20\\ APR \ \ P 3: I S GOOGLE INC., Plaintiff, vs. PACIFIC WEBWORI(S, INC., et aI., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) OISTHICT OF UTAH Civil No. 2:09-CV-I068 BSJ BY:\5EPlJTY CLERK· ORDER Defendant Bloosky Interactive, LLC filed Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Bloosky Interactive's Third-Party Claim (Docket No. 60) against Pacific Webworks, Inc. on July 19, 2010, who in turn filed a Motion to Dismiss Bloosky's Third-Party Complaint (Docket No. 73) on September 1,2010, seeking to dismiss the third-party complaint or in the alternative, to transfer to designated courts agreed to in the contract between such parties, namely federal district courts in Nevada and California. All parties, with the exception of this third-party complaint, resolved the issues in the pending substantive case. The matter came on for hearing to further consider Pacific Webworks, Inc's motion to dismiss or transfer Bloosky Interactive, LLC's third-party complaint on March 21,2011, and appearances were made as follows: Roger R. Myers and Craig A. Buschmann appeared on behalf of Plaintiff; Robert E. Mansfield appeared on behalf of Defendant Pacific Webworks, Inc.; and Blair R. Jackson and Blaine C. Kimrey appeared on behalf of Defendant Bloosky Interactive, LLC (Blaine C. Kimrey appearing by telephone). After due consideration, the court grants the pending motion to dismiss and does so without prejudice. SO ORDERED . .-riJ DATED this ~ day of April, 2011.

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?