Pado, Inc. v. SG Trademark Holding Co. LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 24, 20202:20-cv-01565California3,091 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ) ) Case No.: CV 20-01565-CJC(PVCx) ) 12 PADO, INC., ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ) MOTION TO REMAND [Dkt. 9] AND v. ) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION ) TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF 16 SG TRADEMARK HOLDING CO. ) PERSONAL JURISDICTION [Dkt. 8] ) 17 LLC, et al., ) ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) 21 22 23 24 I. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND 25 Plaintiff Pado, Inc. (“Pado”) brings this unfair competition and false advertising 27 action against Defendants SG Trademark Holding Co. LLC, Wieder and Friedman [First Amended Complaint, hereinafter “FAC”].) Defendants are New York citizens and residents. (FAC ¶¶ 11–14.) Together they operate a business that sells a handheld cordless massager called the “Mighty Bliss” on Amazon. (Id. ¶…

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.