Filed: Apr. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANTI-SLAPP MOTION Re: Dkt. No. 59 MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . Before the Court is defendants' "Joint Motion to Extend Defendants' Time to File Anti-Slapp Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f)," filed April 3, 2018. 1 Having read and considered the motion and supporting declaration, the Court rules as follows. Any motion filed under 425.16, "California's anti-SLAPP statute," see Doe v. Gangland Productions, Inc. ,
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANTI-SLAPP MOTION Re: Dkt. No. 59 MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . Before the Court is defendants' "Joint Motion to Extend Defendants' Time to File Anti-Slapp Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f)," filed April 3, 2018. 1 Having read and considered the motion and supporting declaration, the Court rules as follows. Any motion filed under 425.16, "California's anti-SLAPP statute," see Doe v. Gangland Productions, Inc. , ..
More
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANTI-SLAPP MOTION Re: Dkt. No. 59
MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendants' "Joint Motion to Extend Defendants' Time to File Anti-Slapp Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f)," filed April 3, 2018.1 Having read and considered the motion and supporting declaration, the Court rules as follows.
Any motion filed under § 425.16, "California's anti-SLAPP statute," see Doe v. Gangland Productions, Inc., 730 F.3d 946, 953 (9th Cir. 2013), would be futile, as each of plaintiff's claims arises under federal law and "the anti-SLAPP statute does not apply to federal causes of action." See id. at 955 n.3 (quoting Hilton v. Hallmark Cards, 599 F.3d 894, 901 (9th Cir. 2010)); see also Nunag-Tanedo v. East Baton Rouge Parish School Board, 711 F.3d 1136, 1141 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding "California's anti-SLAPP statute applies only to state law claims").
Accordingly, defendants' motion is hereby DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Defendants were informed that, although plaintiff would not stipulate to the relief sought, he would not oppose the motion. (See Phillips Decl. Ex. A.)
