Malekar

Malekar v. Birley

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 1, 20234:22-cv-06187California3,204 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SHIRISH MALEKAR, Case No. 22-cv-06187-HSG

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

REMAND AND GRANTING MOTION

v. TO DISMISS

VINCE BIRLEY, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 16, 17 Defendants.

12 Before the Court is Plaintiff Shirish Malekar’s motion to remand, Dkt. No. 16, and Defendant Mohammed Baki’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, Dkt. No 17. For the reasons below, the Court DENIES the motion to remand and GRANTS the motion to dismiss. I. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS Plaintiff is a former employee of Vident Financial, a financial management company. Dkt. No. 1-1 (“Compl.”) ¶¶ 15–16. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Vince Birley, the CEO, and Defendant Mohammed Baki, an executive, conspired to defraud him out of his earned equity in Vident Investment Advisory, owned in whole or in part by Vident Financial. See id. ¶¶ 28, 39–68. By the end of his employment in 2018, Plaintiff had a 3.75% vested…

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.