Amatruda

Amatruda v. Werner (FID) Co., Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 20204:19-cv-05446California3,788 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTINE AMATRUDA, Case No. 19-cv-05446-PJH Plaintiff,

v. ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO

DISMISS AND GRANTING MOTION

WERNER (FID) CO., INC., et al., TO QUASH FOR INSUFFICIENT

SERVICE OF PROCESS

Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 24, 26

Defendant Werner Co.’s motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) and quash service under Rule 12(b)(5) and defendant KLI, Inc.’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff Christine Amatruda’s (“plaintiff”) first amended complaint (“FAC”) came on for hearing before this court on January 22, 2020. Plaintiff appeared through her counsel, Leland Belew and Lori Andrus. Defendant Werner Co. appeared through its counsel, Jonathan Hembree, and defendant KLI, Inc. appeared through its counsel, Zack Tolson. Having read the papers filed by the parties and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby GRANTS defendant Werner Co.’s motion to quash for the reasons…

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.