Upstrem, Inc. v. BHFO, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 21, 20213:20-cv-02160California8,515 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 UPSTREM, INC., a California Case No.: 20-CV-2160 JLS (DEB) corporation,

ORDER (1) GRANTING IN PART

AND DENYING IN PART Plaintiff,

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO

14 v. DISMISS; (2) OVERRULING DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO BHFO, Inc., an Iowa corporation,

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER;

AND (3) DENYING MOTION FOR A

PROTECTIVE ORDER Defendant. 18 (ECF Nos. 11, 23, 26) 19

Presently before the Court are three motions filed by Defendant BHFO, Inc. First is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (“MTD,” ECF No. 11-1), to which Plaintiff Upstrem, Inc. filed an Opposition (“MTD Opp’n,” ECF No. 14) and Defendant filed a Reply (“MTD Reply,” ECF No. 17). Next before the Court are Defendant’s Objections to Magistrate Judge’s January 26, 2021 Expedited Discovery Order Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a) (“Objs.,” ECF No. 23-1), and Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition thereto…

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.