Cosmonova, LLC v. Biofilm, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 20253:24-cv-01453California7,809 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 COSMONOVA, LLC, Case No. 24-cv-1453-MMA-JLB

14 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

15 v. DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS

16 BIOFILM, INC., et al., 17 Defendants. [Doc. No. 19] 18 19 20 21 22 23 On December 9, 2024, Defendants BioFilm, Inc. and Combe, Inc. (collectively, 24 “Defendants”), filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Cosmonova, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”) 25 amended complaint. Doc No. 19. Per the Court’s special briefing schedule, Doc. No. 18, 26 Plaintiff filed a response in opposition on December 23, 2024, to which Defendants 27 replied on January 17, 2025. Doc. Nos. 20, 21. The Court found the matter suitable for 28 determination on the papers and without oral argument pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 1 Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7.1.d.1. See Doc. No. 18. For the reasons set forth 2 below, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants’ motion. 3 I.…

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.