Ibanez
Ibanez v. Electric Hydrogen Co.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PEDRO N. IBANEZ, Case No. 24-cv-05302-JST
8 Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
9 v. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
10 ELECTRIC HYDROGEN CO., et al., Re: ECF No. 32 Defendants. 11
12 13 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Pedro N. Ibanez’s motion for reconsideration. ECF 14 No. 32. Because there is neither a factual nor a legal basis for relief, the Court will deny the 15 motion. 16 On August 16, 2024, Mr. Ibanez filed this pro se action accusing Defendants Electric 17 Hydrogen Co., Electric Hydrogen Manufacturing LLC, and Raffi Garabedian of infringing U.S. 18 Patent Application No. 18/761,178 (the “’178 Application”). See ECF No. 1. (“Compl.”). On 19 September 25, 2024, Defendants moved to dismiss Mr. Ibanez’s complaint. ECF No. 8. On 20 December 30, 2024, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss with prejudice. ECF No. 21 30. The Court specifically found it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because “Mr. Ibanez only 22 alleged infringement of a…