Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

FERRARI v. MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC, 15-cv-04379-YGR. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160511968
Filed: May 10, 2016
Latest Update: May 10, 2016
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND Dkt Nos. 54 and 55. YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Plaintiffs Steve Ferrari, et al. ("Plaintiffs") bring the instant putative class action against Defendants Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Autobahn, Inc., David Ahlheim, and Sonic Automotive Inc., alleging claims for: (1) violation of 18 U.S.C. sections 1961 et seq., the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"); California Business & Profe
More

ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Dkt Nos. 54 and 55.

Plaintiffs Steve Ferrari, et al. ("Plaintiffs") bring the instant putative class action against Defendants Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Autobahn, Inc., David Ahlheim, and Sonic Automotive Inc., alleging claims for: (1) violation of 18 U.S.C. sections 1961 et seq., the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"); California Business & Professions Code section 17500, the False Advertising Law ("FAL"); intentional misrepresentation; fraudulent concealment; negligent misrepresentation; violation of California Business & Professions Code section 17200, the Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"); and negligence. Defendants Autobahn, Inc., David Ahlheim, and Sonic Automotive Inc. (collectively, "Autobahn") filed their Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 54). Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC separately filed its Motion to Dismiss to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 55.)

Having carefully considered the papers submitted and the amended pleading in this action, and for the reasons stated on the record at the May 10, 2016 hearing, the Court hereby GRANTS the motions WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiffs shall file their Second Amended Complaint consistent with the Court's statements on the record no later than May 31, 2016. Defendants shall respond within 21 days thereafter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer