Samica Enterprises, LLC v. Mail Boxes Etc. USA, Inc.

Good Law
637 F. Supp. 2d 712·2008 WL 6603803·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109389
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaDecember 22, 2008Case CV 06-2800 ODW (CT)California8,708 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wright II, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [126, 131]

I. INTRODUCTION

On May 9, 2006, over two hundred franchisees, principals and guarantors of “The UPS Store” filed this action against various Mail Boxes Etc., Inc. (“MBE”) and United Parcel Service, Inc. entities (“UPS”). Plaintiffs allege they were duped into investing in The UPS Store franchises, which are (allegedly) economically unviable. On October 29, 2007, the court directed each side to select for trial two “Phase I Plaintiffs” (i.e., those who invested in The UPS Store directly) and two Phase II Plaintiffs (those who converted from Mail Boxes Etc.). The Phase I Plaintiffs are “Rayment,” Center 4605, and “Thomas,” Center 5281 (selected by Plaintiffs), and “Arehambault,” Center 4942, and “Roat,” Center 5145 (selected by Defendants).

Mail Boxes Etc., Inc and United Parcel Service, Inc (DE, NY, and OH) (collectively, “Defendants”) now move for summary judgment or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment against the Phase I Plaintiffs. Defendants argue there are no genuine disputes of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Plaintiffs’ (1) Second Claim for breach of…

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.