Yes Lighting LLC v. PSG Energy Group, LLC, 1:19-cv-03982-JPH-MJD. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Indiana
Number: infdco20191122b81
Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 21, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS JAMES PATRICK HANLON , District Judge . Plaintiff Yes Lighting LLC brought this suit in the Southern District of Florida, raising eight claims relating to an LED lighting supplies and installation partnership. Dkt. 1. After venue was transferred to this district, dkt. 32, Defendant PSG Energy Group, LLC moved to dismiss Count IV (intentional misrepresentation), Count V (negligent misrepresentation), and Count VI (fraud in the inducement), dkt. 40
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS JAMES PATRICK HANLON , District Judge . Plaintiff Yes Lighting LLC brought this suit in the Southern District of Florida, raising eight claims relating to an LED lighting supplies and installation partnership. Dkt. 1. After venue was transferred to this district, dkt. 32, Defendant PSG Energy Group, LLC moved to dismiss Count IV (intentional misrepresentation), Count V (negligent misrepresentation), and Count VI (fraud in the inducement), dkt. 40...
More
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
JAMES PATRICK HANLON, District Judge.
Plaintiff Yes Lighting LLC brought this suit in the Southern District of Florida, raising eight claims relating to an LED lighting supplies and installation partnership. Dkt. 1. After venue was transferred to this district, dkt. 32, Defendant PSG Energy Group, LLC moved to dismiss Count IV (intentional misrepresentation), Count V (negligent misrepresentation), and Count VI (fraud in the inducement), dkt. 40. PSG argues that these claims should be dismissed because Yes Lighting failed to plead them with particularity under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). Dkt. 41.
Yes Lighting has not responded to the motion to dismiss and the deadline to do so has passed. See S.D. Ind. L.R. 7-1(c)(2) ("A party must file any response brief to a motion based on Rule 12(b), (e), or (f) within 21 days after the motion is served. . . ."). Under Local Rule 7-1(c)(5), "[t]he Court may summarily rule on a motion if an opposing party does not file a response within the deadline." Because the deadline for motions for leave to amend the pleadings is December 13, 2019, dkt. 48 at 2, the Court summarily GRANTS PSG's motion to dismiss, dkt. [40], without prejudice to Yes Lighting filing a motion for leave to amend the complaint. Counts IV, V, and VI are DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
