Lamar

Lamar v. Legoland California, LLC.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 20, 20233:20-cv-01049California9,623 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 WILLIAM LUM, et. al, Consolidated Case No.: 20cv01049 JAH-MSB Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MERLIN ENTERTAINMENTS GROUP MOTION TO DISMISS [Doc. No. 38] U.S. HOLDINGS INC, et. al, 14 Defendants. 15 16 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ consolidated complaint (“CC”) in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs filed an opposition and Defendants filed a reply. After a review of the parties’ submissions and for the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendants’ motion. BACKGROUND Following this Court’s order granting Plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate and related plaintiff’s motion to appoint interim counsel, counsel filed a consolidated complaint

26 1 In support of their motion, Defendants seek judicial notice of numerous…

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.