Filed: Nov. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2018
Summary: ORDER RE: MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND RELATED MOTIONS; ORDER SETTING COMPLIANCE HEARING Re: Dkt. Nos. 8, 35 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . On November 14, 2018, the Court heard argument with respect to (i) Tomcoh Commerce Inc.'s ("Momentum") motion for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 8), and (ii) defendants Treeti, Inc.'s ("Treeti"), and Amorette Jones', Brandi Becker-Jones', and Thomas Lakeman's (together, the "Individual Defendants") motion to dismiss Momentum's com
Summary: ORDER RE: MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND RELATED MOTIONS; ORDER SETTING COMPLIANCE HEARING Re: Dkt. Nos. 8, 35 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . On November 14, 2018, the Court heard argument with respect to (i) Tomcoh Commerce Inc.'s ("Momentum") motion for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 8), and (ii) defendants Treeti, Inc.'s ("Treeti"), and Amorette Jones', Brandi Becker-Jones', and Thomas Lakeman's (together, the "Individual Defendants") motion to dismiss Momentum's comp..
More
ORDER RE: MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND RELATED MOTIONS; ORDER SETTING COMPLIANCE HEARING
Re: Dkt. Nos. 8, 35
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
On November 14, 2018, the Court heard argument with respect to (i) Tomcoh Commerce Inc.'s ("Momentum") motion for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 8), and (ii) defendants Treeti, Inc.'s ("Treeti"), and Amorette Jones', Brandi Becker-Jones', and Thomas Lakeman's (together, the "Individual Defendants") motion to dismiss Momentum's complaint or, in the alternative, dismiss the Individual Defendants and compel arbitration (Dkt. No. 35). At the hearing, the Court focused on the sole viable basis for Momentum's motion, namely that regarding defendants' alleged possession and/or use of Momentum's Confidential and Proprietary Information (together, "Momentum's Materials"), as those terms are defined in the Professional Services Agreement ("PSA") and the Mutual Confidentiality Agreement.1 In light of the oral argument, the Court ordered defendants to file supplemental declarations regarding the current state of destruction and/or return of all of Momentum's Materials (Dkt. No. 41), which were filed on November 19, 2018 (Dkt. Nos. 43-46.)
Having carefully reviewed the sworn statements made therein, and in light of defense counsel's representations made at oral argument, the Court hereby DENIES AS MOOT the sole viable basis of Momentum's motion for preliminary injunction.2 Such denial is WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling, should Momentum become aware that the state of destruction and/or return of Momentum's Materials is inconsistent with the declarations submitted by defendants.
With respect to the remaining issues, Momentum and Treeti are ORDERED, pursuant to paragraph 8.2 of the PSA, to proceed before JAMS to arbitrate the instant dispute. As for the Individual Defendants, the action is STAYED. Defendants' motion to dismiss Momentum's complaint as it pertains to the Individual Defendants is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling, should the arbitration not resolve the dispute in its entirety.
In addition, the Court SETS a compliance hearing regarding the status of the arbitration for Friday, March 29, 2019 on the Court's 9:01 a.m. calendar. Five (5) business days prior to the day of the hearing, the parties shall file a Joint Statement, not to exceed three (3) pages, setting forth the status of the arbitration.
If compliance is complete, the parties need not appear, and the compliance hearing will be taken off calendar.
This Order terminates Docket Numbers 8 and 35.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
