Legal Opinion
BioQ Pharma Incorporated v. GS Holding
District Court, N.D. California
Decided January 10, 2024No. 3:23-cv-00399Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BIOQ PHARMA INCORPORATED, Case No. 23-cv-00399-AMO 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE MOTION FOR DEFAULT 9 v. AND MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT 10 STAR CAPITAL INVESTMENTS LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 16, 18 11 Defendants. 12 13 Before the Court are Plaintiff BioQ Pharma Incorporated’s Motion for Entry of Default or, 14 in the Alternative, to Permit Alternative Service filed by (ECF 16) and a Motion to Set Aside 15 Default filed by Defendants GS Holding and Star Capital Investments LLC (ECF 18). The 16 motions are fully briefed and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Gary R. Eitel v. William D. McCoolCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio International Interlink, Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio International InterlinkCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Egelhoff v. Egelhoff Ex Rel. BreinerSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- United States v. Signed Personal Check No. 730 of MesleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Brandt v. American Bankers Ins. Co. of FloridaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.