Pouladdej

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MATILOCK, INC., Case No. 20-cv-01186-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART MOTION TO

9 v. DISMISS

10 PAYMAN POULADDEJ, Re: Dkt. No. 16 11 Defendant.

12 13 Pending before the Court is Defendant Payman Pouladdej’s motion to dismiss. The Court 14 finds this matter appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matter is deemed 15 submitted. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons detailed below, the Court GRANTS IN PART 16 and DENIES IN PART the motion to dismiss. 17 I. BACKGROUND1 18 This case involves a dispute between a start-up company and its investor. Plaintiff 19 Matilock, Inc. alleges that Plaintiff is a start-up company “focused on providing solutions for user 20 verification” for businesses such as banking, cryptocurrency, and insurance. See Dkt. No. 12 21 (“FAC”) at ¶ 11. In January 2017, Defendant met with Plaintiff’s Chief Executive Officer, Filip 22 Victor, and decided to…