Legal Opinion

Novoselac v. ISM Vuzem d.o.o.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided June 3, 2022No. 5:21-cv-08654Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 STJEPAN NOVOSELAC, et al., Case No. 21-cv-08654-BLF 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 9 v. DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND 10 ISM VUZEM D.O.O., et al., [Re: ECF 12] 11 Defendants. 12 13 14 15 Defendants Tesla, Inc. and Eisenmann Corporation (“Moving Parties”) seek dismissal of 16 the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs’ counsel did not appear 17 when the case was called for hearing at 9:30 a.m. on May 19, 2022. After waiting until 9:45 a.m., 18 the Court…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Eminence Capital, Llc, and Jay Spechler v. Aspeon, Inc. Richard P. StackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  4. American Pipe & Construction Co. v. UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API