Larson v. American Honda Motor Company, Inc.
Larson v. American Honda Motor Company, Inc.
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TERRI LARSON, JAMESON JAUKEN, Case No.: 3:23-CV-01238-L-BGS CHARLES KADLUBOWSKI, GEORGE 12 WERNER, MARTHA VELASQUEZ, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 13 DAVID JOSEPHSON, CAROL STAY OR DISMISS AS MOOT HARDIFER, CARMINE D'AMATO, 14 CAROL ALLEN, CATHERINE DAVIS, [ECF No. 7] 15 STACY REISER, SUNGWON HAN, ARIKA KUHLMANN, and RIC 16 HEATON, Individually and On Behalf of 17 All Others Similarly Situated, 18 Plaintiffs, 19 v. 20 AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC., a California 21 corporation, and HONDA MOTOR 22 COMPANY, LTD, a foreign corporation, 23 Defendants. 24
25 Pending before the court is a motion to stay the complaint, or in the alternative 26 dismiss for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff filed an amended complaint 27 (ECF No. 11.) See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 15(a)(1)(B). Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is 28 1 ||denied as moot. See Ramirez v. County of San Bernardino,
806 F.3d 1002, 1008(9th Cir. 2 ||2015). Further, the motion to stay is also denied as moot as the stay was based on the 3 || similarity of the allegations in the original complaint to a pending action in another 4 district court. (See ECF No. 7.) Defendants may renew their arguments to stay based on 5 amended complaint. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: December 29, 2023 1 fee fp 9 H . James Lorenz, 10 United States District Judge
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown