Crosby

Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians v. Crosby

Good Law
122 F. Supp. 3d 982·2015 WL 4879650·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107465
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 14, 2015No. 2:15-cv-00538-GEB-CMKCalifornia5,201 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burrell, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

The following Defendants seek dismissal of claims in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”): Ines Crosby, John Crosby, Leslie Lohse, Larry Lohse (collectively, the “Employee Defendants”), Juan Pata, Chris Pata, Sherry Myers, Frank James, The Patriot Gold & Silver Exchange, Norman R. Ryan (collectively, with the Employee Defendants, “Pata Defendants”), Umpqua Bank, Umpqua Holdings Corporation (collectively, “Umpqua Defendants”), Cornerstone Community Bank, Cornerstone Community Bancorp, Jeffery Finck (collectively, “Cornerstone Defendants”), Garth Moore, Garth Moore Insurance and Financial Services, Inc. (collectively, “Moore Defendants”), Associated Pension Consultants, Inc. (“APC”), Robert M. Haness, and Haness & Associates, LLC (collectively, “Haness Defendants”).

The Pata Defendants and Moore Defendants seek dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Umpqua Defendants, Cornerstone Defendants, Moore Defendants, APC, and Haness Defendants seek dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.

I. FACTUAL…

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.