Michael Terpin v. AT and T Inc

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 20202:18-cv-06975California5,140 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

O 1

2 3 4 5 6 7

8 United States District Court 9 Central District of California

10

11 MICHAEL TERPIN, Case No. 2:18-cv-06975-ODW (KSx)

12 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, AND

13 v.

DENYING, IN PART,

14 AT&T MOBILITY, LLC, et al., DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO 15 DISMISS [33] Defendants.

16 17 I. INTRODUCTION 18 Defendant AT&T Mobility, LLC (“AT&T”) moves to dismiss Plaintiff Michael 19 Terpin’s (“Terpin”) First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (the “Motion”). (Mot., ECF 20 No. 33.) For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS, IN PART, AND DENIES, 21 IN PART, AT&T’s Motion.1 22 II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 23 As previously set forth in the Court’s July 19, 2019 Order (“July Order”), (ECF 24 No. 29), granting in part and denying in part AT&T’s motion to dismiss the original 25 Complaint, Mr. Terpin is a prominent and well-known member of the cryptocurrency 26 community. (FAC ¶¶ 18–19, ECF No. 32.) He is domiciled in Puerto Rico with a 27

28 1 Having carefully considered the papers filed in connection with the…

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.