Poorsina
Poorsina v. Tseng
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ALI POORSINA, Case No. 20-cv-09122-VC
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
v. DISMISS
TAN TSENG, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 85 Defendants.
The motion to dismiss is granted. While Poorsina does a better job this time around of alleging the conspiracy element of his antitrust claim, he still fails to adequately allege an antitrust injury. Poorsina alleges that Tseng and a co-conspirator named Steve communicated with each other on their cell phones during the auction and agreed as to when Steve should stop bidding so that Tseng’s bid would prevail. While certainly not a model of specificity, this new allegation provides the type of factual content that was altogether missing from the previous complaint. Construed liberally in light of Poorsina’s pro se status, this allegation plausibly suggests an agreement to engage in bid-rigging, a per se violation of the Sherman Act. See United States v. Joyce, 895 F.3d 673, 676–77 (9th Cir. 2018).1 But the sole injury alleged in the complaint is the eviction of Poorsina and his family
1 The Court has reviewed the video…