Weiser Law Firm Pc v. Michael Hartleib

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 5, 202423-55693California3,239 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 5 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WEISER LAW FIRM PC; ROBERT B. Nos. 23-55693

WEISER, 23-55729

Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. 8:23-cv-00171-CJC-JDE

v.

MEMORANDUM*

MICHAEL HARTLEIB,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted June 5, 2024 Pasadena, California

Before: COLLINS and LEE, Circuit Judges, and RODRIGUEZ,** District Judge.

Plaintiffs Weiser Law Firm PC and Robert Weiser, its principal and founder,

(collectively, “Weiser”) appeal the district court’s order granting Defendant

Michael Hartleib’s special motion to strike under California’s anti-Strategic

Lawsuit Against Public Participation (“anti-SLAPP”) statute, see CAL. CODE CIV.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Xavier Rodriguez, United States District Judge for the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.