Delta Stone Products v. Xpertfreight et al

Filing 69

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING FIRST MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING SECOND MOTION TO DISMISS- denying as moot 47 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim ; granting 20 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. The second and third causes of action of plaintiff's complaint against Harbor Freight are dismissed. See Order for additional details. Signed by Judge Clark Waddoups on 12/12/16. (jmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

DELTA STONE PRODUCTS,
Plaintiff,
v.
HARBOR FREIGHT TRANSPORT CORP.,
US EXPRESS, LLC, EMBASSY CARGO
S.P.A., RSA SUN INSURANCE OFFICE,
LTD., SERAN SALAMON, an individual,
RAFIK NAZAROV, an individual, and
DOES 1 through 10,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER GRANTING FIRST MOTION
TO DISMISS AND DENYING SECOND
MOTION TO DISMISS

Case No. 2:16-cv-00369-CW
Judge Clark Waddoups

Defendants.

This matter is before the court on a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second and Third
Causes of Action filed by defendant Harbor Freight Transport Corp. (Dkt. No. 20.) A hearing on
the motion was held before the Honorable Clark Waddoups on December 1, 2016. Gregory
Roberts appeared on behalf of Delta Stone Products and Venus Booth appeared on behalf of
Harbor Freight Transport Corp. For the reasons stated on the record, the court finds that Delta
Stone’s second and third causes of action against Harbor Freight are preempted by the Carmack
Amendment. Harbor Freight’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 20) is therefore GRANTED. Upon
additional discovery, should additional facts uncover that the Carmack Amendment does not
apply to Harbor Freight then the court will consider granting Delta Stone leave to amend their
complaint to add their state law claims.
Harbor Freight brought a second motion to dismiss state-law contribution cross-claims
filed by US Express, LLC, who was represented by Nicholas Dudoich at the hearing. (Dkt. No.

47.) The parties agreed that if the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second and Third Causes of
Action filed by defendant Harbor Freight Transport Corp. was granted then the second motion to
dismiss the state law cross-claims would be moot and should therefore be denied. After due
consideration of the parties’ filings and oral arguments, and otherwise being fully advised,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons stated on the record, that defendant Harbor
Freight Transport Corp.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second and Third Causes of Action
(Dkt. No. 20) is GRANTED. The second and third causes of action of plaintiff’s complaint
against Harbor Freight are dismissed. Defendant/Cross-Defendant Harbor Freight Transport
Corp.’s Motion to Dismiss US Express, LLC’s First and Second Claims against Harbor Freight
Transport Corp. (Dkt. No. 47) is DENIED on the grounds of mootness.
SO ORDERED this 12th day of December, 2016.
BY THE COURT:

______________________________
Clark Waddoups
United States District Court Judge