Dorfman

Peak Health Center v. Dorfman

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 16, 20205:19-cv-04145California4,258 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 PEAK HEALTH CENTER, Case No. 19-cv-04145-VKD

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

10 v. DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR

ATTORNEYS’ FEES

11 BRANDON DORFMAN, Re: Dkt. No. 55 Defendant. 12

13 Defendant Brandon Dorfman moves for attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to California’s 14 Anti-Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (“anti-SLAPP”) statute, California Code of 15 Civil Procedure § 425.16(c). Dkt. No. 55. Plaintiff Peak Health Center (“Peak Health”) opposes 16 the motion. Dkt. No. 58. 17 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds Mr. Dorfman’s motion suitable for 18 decision without oral argument. For the reasons described below, the Court grants in part and 19 denies in part the motion for fees. 20 I. BACKGROUND 21 Peak Health filed this action on July 18, 2019, followed by a first amended complaint 22 (“FAC”) on July 30, 2019 asserting claims for trade libel; intentional interference…

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.