Legal Opinion

Rubenstein v. Smith

District Court, C.D. California

Decided September 16, 2015No. Case No. 2:14-cv-09107-ODW (JC)Published

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [34]

OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendants David E. Smith, MMB Holdings LLC, and Mojobear Capital LLC (collectively “Defendants”) move to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In the alternative, Defendants move to dismiss the Complaint for failure to join an indispensable party. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 34.)

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This is an action to recover short-swing profits under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Safe Air for Everyone v. MeyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  4. Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  5. Richard McCarthy v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988

18 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