Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

15-5887 - Hatteras Enterprises Inc et al v. Forsythe Cosmetic Group Ltd et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
15-5887 - Hatteras Enterprises Inc et al v. Forsythe Cosmetic Group Ltd et al
July 30, 2016
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER denying 28 Motion to Change Venue - For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs motion to retransfer this case to the Central District of California is denied in its entirety. Further, on July 5, 2016, the parties filed a proposed stipulation requesting a stay of discovery during the pendency of this motion. In addition, the Plaintiffs indicated that in the event their motion for retransfer is denied, they would likely seek to appeal the August 5, 2015 Order in the Ninth Circuit. The Plaintiffs are directed to file on ECF within seven days of the date of this Order a letter indicating how they intend to proceed with this case in light of this Order -- namely, whether they intend to file an appeal in the Ninth Circuit, and if so, whether the Court must stay this matter during the pendency of that appeal. SEE ATTACHED DECISION for details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 7/30/16. (Coleman, Laurie)
March 6, 2018
PDF | More
SHORT FORM ORDER - Presently pending before the Court is a 43 motion by the Defendants to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FED. R. CIV. P. or Rule) 12(b)(6). However, the Court is unable to rule on the Defendants' motion at this time because neither party has briefed the issue of choice of law in any way. Therefore, the parties are directed to file briefs on the question of the choice of law. Accordingly, the parties are directed to file briefs no larger than ten (10) pages discussing the above issues on or before March 27, 2018. If either party wishes to respond to the other party's brief, they shall do so no later than April 3, 2018. Reply briefs are limited to five (5) pages. No extensions of time will be granted, as neither party saw fit to brief this issue in the first instance. SEE ATTACHED ORDER for details. SO ORDERED by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 3/6/2018. (Coleman, Laurie)
April 23, 2018
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER: For the reasons stated above, the Defendants 43 motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) is granted in part, and denied in part. It is granted to the extent that the Plaintiffs statutory and common law claims for fraud, and the request for rescission based on fraud are dismissed. Those claims are dismissed without prejudice. It is denied to the extent that the Plaintiffs claim for breach of contract, and request for injunctive relief, accounting, and constructive trust survive. The Plaintiffs bare request for leave to amend is denied without prejudice as procedurally improper. The Plaintiffs are granted leave to refile their request as a formal motion. Such motion must be made within thirty days of this order. SEE ATTACHED DECISION for details. SO ORDERED by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 4/23/2018. (Coleman, Laurie)