Sarjeant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES SARJEANT, et al., Case No. 24-cv-01216-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART HONEYWELL'S

MOTION TO DISMISS

FOSTER WHEELER LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 105 Defendants.

Honeywell’s motion to dismiss the first cause of action for products liability is denied. Honeywell’s motion to dismiss the second cause of action for negligence is partially granted and partially denied. And Honeywell’s motion to dismiss the fifth cause of action for fraud is granted. This ruling assumes the reader is familiar with the facts, the applicable legal standards, and the arguments made by both parties. Sarjeant alleges two categories of asbestos exposure that he attributes to Honeywell. First, he alleges that he worked with “automotive friction products including Bendix-brand asbestos-containing brakes.” Second, he alleges that he did work on the RMS Queen Mary in Long Beach alongside contractors from Honeywell “who were disturbing ship parts that contained asbestos.” Honeywell argues that this is insufficiently specific to plead causation. But Sarjeant has done enough to…