Cline

Cline v. Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaApril 23, 20253:24-cv-02081California2,818 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM CLINE, Case No.: 24-cv-2081-JES-JLB

12 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

13 v. MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK

OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION

14 DAN-BUNKERING (AMERICA), INC.,

15 Defendant. [ECF No. 11] 16 17 Before the Court is Defendant Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss 18 for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction. ECF No. 11. Plaintiff filed an opposition, and Defendant 19 filed a reply. ECF Nos. 20, 25. On February 12, 2025, the Court held a hearing on the 20 matter and took it under submission. ECF No. 28. After due consideration and for the 21 reasons discussed below, the motion is GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED for lack 22 of personal jurisdiction. 23 I. BACKGROUND 24 Plaintiff William Cline instituted this lawsuit against Defendant Dan-Bunkering, 25 seeking a declaration from the Court regarding the enforceability of a non-compete clause 26 in his employment agreement with…

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.