Lamar
Lamar v. Legoland California, LLC.
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…