Embry

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 B&G Foods North America, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-00526-KJM-DB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 Kim Embry, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff B&G Foods North America, Inc. (B&G) brings this action under 42 U.S.C. 18 | § 1983 against defendants Kim Embry and Environmental Health Advocates, Inc. (EHA). 19 | Plaintiff alleges defendants violated its First Amendment rights by bringing sham private 20 | enforcement actions under California chemical disclosure rules commonly known as 21 | “Proposition 65.” Defendants now move to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay proceedings 22 | under the first-to-file doctrine. Defendants also move for a protective order staying discovery 23 | pending resolution of the motion to dismiss. The court denies defendants’ motion to dismiss and, 24 | accordingly, denies the motion for a protective order. 25 | I. BACKGROUND 26 The court incorporates by reference the factual and procedural history of…