Copple

Copple v. Astrella & Rice, P.C.

Good Law
442 F. Supp. 2d 829·2006 WL 2331005·2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57322
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 9, 2006C 05-3961 JSWCalifornia3,367 words

Opinion

Opinion

White, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before the Court upon consideration of the motion to dis miss the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) filed by Astrella & Rice, P.C., Baker, Burton & Lundy, P.C., Engstrom, Lipscomp & Lack, Girardi & Keese, J. Tynan Kelly, Kiesel, Boucher & Larson, LLP, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, M. Brian McMahon, O’Donnell & Schaeffer, LLP, Michael J. Ponce, Francis O. Scarpulla, and Douglas A. Stacey (collectively “Attorney Defendants”) (1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (2) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Also before the Court are requests for judicial notice filed by both parties.

Having reviewed the parties’ papers, relevant legal authority, the record in this case, and having had the benefit of oral argument, the Court HEREBY GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss, GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’ requests for judicial notice, and GRANTS Plaintiffs request for judicial notice.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Robert W. Copple…

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.