Edelmania Production, LLC v. Jordan Service

I. INTRODUCTION

19 Plaintiffs Josh Edelman and Edelmania Productions, LLC initiated this suit 20 against Defendant Jordan Service, and Service, proceeding pro se, answered and 21 counterclaimed against Plaintiffs. (See Compl., ECF No. 1; Answer & Countercl., 22 ECF No. 22.) Plaintiffs move for judgment on the pleadings as to their Complaint 23 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(c), (Mot. J., ECF No. 25), and also 24 to dismiss Service’s Counterclaim under Rule 12(b)(6), (Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 24). 25 For the following reasons, the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED, and 26 the Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.1

28 1 Having carefully considered the papers filed in connection with the motions, the Court deemed the matters appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. Case 2:22-cv-02484-ODW-PVC Document Filed 01/26/ Page 2 of Page ID #:387

II. BACKGROUND For purposes of Plaintiffs’ Rule 12(b)(6) and Rule 12(c) motions, the Court 3 accepts Service’s well-pleaded counterclaim allegations as true. Lee v. City of…