Wadler

Wadler v. Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.

Good Law
141 F. Supp. 3d 1005·2015 WL 6438670·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144468
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 23, 2015Case No. 15-cv-02356-JCSCalifornia11,659 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Spero, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Sanford Wadler brings a whis-tleblower action against Defendants Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”) and the individual members of Bio-Rad’s Board of Directors, contending he was wrongfully terminated in retaliation for investigating and reporting to Bio-Rad’s upper-level management possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) in China. Wadler asserts claims under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Act, *1008 and California state law. Presently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (“Motion”), which came on for hearing on September 4, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. The parties submitted supplemental briefs on September 25, 2015. For the reasons stated below, the Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

II. BACKGROUND

A. The Complaint

In the Complaint, Wadler alleges that he became Bio-Rad’s general counsel in 1989 and served in that position for nearly 25 years. Compl. ¶ 2. According to Plaintiff, Bio-Rad is a Fortune 1000 company that manufactures and sells products and equipment around the world. Id. ¶ 6. Because Bio-Rad sells…

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.