Thomas Land & Development, LLC v. Vratsinas Construction Company
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS LAND & DEVELOPMENT, Case No.: 18-CV-1896-AJB-NLS
LLC,
12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND v. DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’
VRATSINAS CONSTRUCTION MOTIONS TO DIMISS
14 COMPANY, an Arkansas corporation; et (Docs. No. 4, 25). al., Defendants. 17 Defendant Vratsinas Construction Company moves to dismiss Plaintiff Thomas Land & Development’s complaint, asserting (1) Plaintiff fails to adequately allege standing under Rule 12(b)(1); (2) Plaintiff fails to establish personal jurisdiction over Vratsinas under Rule 12(b)(2); (3) Plaintiff fails to establish proper venue under Rule 12(b)(3); and (4) that Plaintiff has not alleged any facts establishing a plausible claim for relief under its RICO, Sherman Act, and negligence causes of action under Rule 12(b)(6). (Doc. No. 4-1.) A second motion to dismiss made by other VCC entities and the individually named defendants raises nearly identical arguments. (Doc. No. 25.) The…