Jeff Jonah v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation et al

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-03243

Proposed Order GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS AND STRIKE AMENDED COMPLAINT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STAY

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

Case4:15-cv-03243-PJH Document27-1 Filed09/02/15 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION 13 14 JEFF JONAH, an individual, on behalf of) Case No. 15-cv-03243-PJH 15 himself, the general public and those) similarly situated,) Assigned to: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton 16) Plaintiff,) 17) v.) [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 18) DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION;) AND STRIKE AMENDED COMPLAINT, 19 KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE,) OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, ORDER INC.; KIMBERLY-CLARK GLOBAL) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO 20 SALES LLC; and DOES 1 through 50) STAY) 21 Defendants.)) 22)) 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, TO STAY CASE NO. 15-CV-03243-PJH Case4:15-cv-03243-PJH Document27-1 Filed09/02/15 Page2 of 4 1 ORDER 2 Defendants Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Kimberly Clark Global Sales, LLC and Kimberly-3 Clark Worldwide, Inc.’s ("Defendants" or "Kimberly-Clark") Motion to Dismiss and to Strike 4 Portions of the Amended Complaint, or in the Alternative, to Stay, came on regularly for hearing on 5 October 7, 2015, before the Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton in Courtroom 3 of the above-titled Court. 6 The parties appeared through counsel of record. Having considered the submissions and argument of 7 the parties, 8 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED THAT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is 9 GRANTED. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 24) is hereby DISMISSED pursuant to 10 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Plaintiff has failed to establish standing to 11 state a claim for prospective injunctive relief because he has not alleged facts demonstrating that he 12 will be injured by the alleged misrepresentations in the future. In addition, Plaintiff’s claims are 13 time-barred. Plaintiff has also failed to plead any claim with the degree of particularity required by 14 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), and has failed to allege facts sufficient to support his claim that 15 Defendants fraudulently omitted or concealed material facts. 16 The Court also sustains Defendants’ Motion to Strike pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 17 Procedure 12(f), and STRIKES Paragraphs 45-51, 62, 65-66, 68-70 of Plaintiff’s Amended 18 Complaint as immaterial and impertinent. 19 IT IS ALSO HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED THAT Defendants’ Motion to 20 Stay is GRANTED. The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Davidson v. Kimberly-Clark, et al., 9th Cir. 21 Case No. 15-16173 is likely to have binding effect on at least some of the issues in dispute this 22 action under principles of stare decisis or at a minimum, will provide substantial guidance to this 23 Court. A stay of this action pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Davidson is likely to promote the 24 orderly course of justice. Moreover, the relative hardship or inequity weighs in favor of granting a 25 stay. Accordingly, this action is stayed pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Davidson v. 26 Kimberly-Clark, et al., 9th Cir. Case No. 15-16173. 27///28///1 ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, TO STAY CASE NO. 15-CV-03243-PJH Case4:15-cv-03243-PJH Document27-1 Filed09/02/15 Page3 of 4 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Dated: THE HONORABLE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, TO STAY CASE NO. 15-CV-03243-PJH