Grausz
Grausz v. The Hershey Company
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EVA GRAUSZ, on behalf of herself, all Case No.: 23-cv-00028-AJB-SBC others similarly situated, and the general 12 public, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S Plaintiff, MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S
THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
v. (Doc. No. 44)
THE HERSHEY COMPANY,
17 Defendant.
19 Presently pending before the Court is Defendant the Hershey Company’s motion to 20 dismiss (Doc. No. 44) Plaintiff Eva Grausz’s Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) (Doc. 21 No. 43) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiff filed an opposition 22 to the motion to dismiss, (Doc. No. 46), to which Hershey replied, (Doc. No. 47). Pursuant 23 to Civil Local Rule 7.1.d.1, the Court finds the instant matter suitable for determination on 24 the papers and without oral argument. For the reasons stated herein, the Court GRANTS 25 IN PART and DENIES IN PART Hershey’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s TAC. 26 /// 27 /// 28 I. BACKGROUND Defendant Hershey…