Boswell

Boswell v. Babcock

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 7, 20204:20-cv-06571California2,744 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JOSEPH BOSWELL, et al., Case No. 20-cv-06571-JSW

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, AND

v. DENYING, IN PART, MOTION TO

DISMISS AND SETTING INITIAL

MICHAEL BABCOCK, et al., CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 11

12 Now before the Court for consideration is the motion to dismiss filed by Michael Babcock (“Babcock”). The Court has considered the parties’ papers, relevant legal authority, and the record in this case, and it finds the motion suitable for disposition without oral argument. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). The Court VACATES the hearing scheduled for December 11, 2020, and it HEREBY GRANTS, IN PART, AND DENIES, IN PART, Babcock’s motion, with leave to amend. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs, Joseph Boswell (“Boswell”) and Greg Sarlo (“Sarlo”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”), bring claims against Babcock and two corporate defendants, Pure Natures Design, Inc. (“PND”) and Xtreme…

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.