Kelley

BACKGROUND

20 Unless otherwise noted, the following facts are undisputed. Plaintiffs bring claims against 21 Daiho, the AW Defendants, and the Wal-Mart Defendants for wrongful death (claim 1), strict 22 product liability based on design defects, manufacturing defects, and failure to warn (claims 2 23 24    Plaintiffs, the AW Defendants, and Walmart Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, and Wal-Mart Stores East, LLC (collectively the “Wal-Mart Defendants”) asked the Court to defer ruling on the motion to allow discovery, pursuant to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 26 56(d). The parties later stipulated to withdraw those requests. (Dkt. Nos. 264-265.) The Wal- Mart Defendants did not file a substantive opposition to Daiho’s motion. through 4), negligence (claim 5), breach of express and implied warranties (claims 6 and 7), violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law and California’s False Advertising Law (claims 8 and 9), public nuisance (claim 10), negligent infliction of emotional distress (claim 11), and a survival claim (claim 12). The AW Defendants filed a cross-claim against Daiho seeking indemnification and…