Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Filing 67

MEMORANDUM in Support re 65 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and in the Alternative for Clarification of the Pleading which is Subject to Plaintiff's Motion filed by Impulse Marketing Group Inc. (Ivey, Floyd)

Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Doc. 67

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 67

Filed 09/08/2005

1

Floyd E. Ivey Liebler, Ivey & Connor, P.S. 3 1141 N. Edison, Suite C P.O. Box 6125 4 Kennewick, WA 99336 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON JAMES S. GORDON, JR., an individual residing in Benton County, Washington, Pl a i n t i f f s vs. IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., a Nevada Corporation, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. CV-04-5125-FVS DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE PLEADING WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

Defendants ) ___________________________________ ) IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., ) ) Third-Party Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) BONNIE GORDON, JAMES S. GORDON, ) III, JONATHAN GORDON, JAMILA ) GORDON, ROBERT PRITCHETT and ) EMILY ABBEY, ) ) Third-Party Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint.

Plaintiff has moved to Dismiss relative to the original Defendant's However, Defendant Impulse Marketing Group, Inc. filed its First Amended Answer, Amended Counterclaims and Third-Party Amended Complaint on September 6, 2005.
Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and in the Alternative for Clarification of the Pleading Which is the Subject of Plaintiff's Motiont - 1.
LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE Attorneys at Law P.O. Box 6125 Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125 [phone]

Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for S u m m a r y Judgment\DEfednant' otionStrikeorForClarification\MemorandumSupportingD sM efendantsMotionToClarifyOrStrikePlaintiffsMotion.050908.wpd

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 67

Filed 09/08/2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Plaintiff's Motion, relative to the original Answer, is now rescheduled for October 12, 2005. However, Defendant's filing of the Amended Answer renders moot the original Answer. Proceeding with argument of Plaintiff's Motion pertaining to the original Answer renders confusion over which pleading is the subject of Argument. Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss is moot, in light of the Defendant's Filing of its Amended Answer, and should be stricken. Defendant's Amended Answer supercedes the original Answer, thus making the motion to dismiss the original Answer moot. The Amended Answer becomes the operative pleading. Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss should be stricken. Kentucky Press Ass'n, Inc. v. Kentucky 355 F.Supp.2d 853, 857 (E.D.Ky.2005); Parry v. Mohawk Motors of Mich., Inc., 236 F.3d 299, 306 (6th Cir.2000); Pure Country, Inc. v. Sigma Chi Fraternity 312 F.3d 952, 956 (8th Cir. Mo. 2002). Defendant respectfully requests the Court to Strike Plaintiff's Motion To Dismiss Counterclaims and Third Party Defendants Under FRCP 12(b)(6) or in The Alternative For Summary Judgment Under FRCP 56 or in The Alternative to Dismiss Under FRCP 9(b). DATED this 8th day of September, 2005. LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE By /s/ FLOYD E. IVEY FLOYD E. IVEY, WSBA #6888 Local Counsel for Defendant

I hereby certify that on September 8, 2005, I electronically filed Defendant's Memorandum In Support of Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and in the Alternative for Clarification of the 23 Pleading Which is the Subject of Plaintiff's Motion with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which will send notification of such filing to Douglas 24 E. McKinley, Jr. and transmitted via internet to Peter Glantz.
25 26 27 28
Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and in the Alternative for Clarification of the Pleading Which is the Subject of Plaintiff's Motiont - 2.
LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE Attorneys at Law P.O. Box 6125 Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125 [phone]

S/ FLOYD E. IVEY FLOYD E. IVEY

Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for S u m m a r y Judgment\DEfednant' otionStrikeorForClarification\MemorandumSupportingD sM efendantsMotionToClarifyOrStrikePlaintiffsMotion.050908.wpd