Filed: Aug. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER: 1. REQUESTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING AND 2. VACATING HEARING DATE JOHN A. HOUSTON , District Judge . Pending before the Court is Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc's ("Sprouts" or "Defendant") motion to dismiss five of the six causes of action brought by Ronald Cohn, Inc. dba Sprouts Farmers Market ("Plaintiff") pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12b(6) for failure to state a claim for relief: (1) under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq. ("UCL"), (2) for intentional and negli
Summary: ORDER: 1. REQUESTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING AND 2. VACATING HEARING DATE JOHN A. HOUSTON , District Judge . Pending before the Court is Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc's ("Sprouts" or "Defendant") motion to dismiss five of the six causes of action brought by Ronald Cohn, Inc. dba Sprouts Farmers Market ("Plaintiff") pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12b(6) for failure to state a claim for relief: (1) under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq. ("UCL"), (2) for intentional and neglig..
More
ORDER:
1. REQUESTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING AND
2. VACATING HEARING DATE
JOHN A. HOUSTON, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc's ("Sprouts" or "Defendant") motion to dismiss five of the six causes of action brought by Ronald Cohn, Inc. dba Sprouts Farmers Market ("Plaintiff") pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12b(6) for failure to state a claim for relief: (1) under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. ("UCL"), (2) for intentional and negligent interference with past and prospective economic relations, (3) for common law unfair competition, and (4) under Corp. Code §31000 at seq. (violation of the Franchise Investment Law ("FIL")). Doc. No. 8. Defendant also moves to strike Plaintiff's second cause of action for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing in relation to the implied terms of the parties' Trademark License Agreements ("TLA"). Doc. No. 11. Both motions have been fully briefed by the parties. Doc. Nos. 14-17.
After a careful review of the pleadings, the Court requests supplemental briefing. Specifically, Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiff's claims for intentional and negligent tortious interference with past and prospective economic advantage. In 2007, the Ninth Circuit, citing the California Supreme Court, held that "interference with prospective economic advantage requires a plaintiff to allege an act that is wrongful independent of the interference itself." CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. Werner Enterprises, Inc., 479 F.3d 1099, 1108 (9th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The parties shall each file supplemental briefing, not to exceed seven pages in length, addressing Ninth Circuit and California Supreme Court case law regarding the sufficiency of Plaintiff's tortious interference claims including, but not limited to, the effect of the Ninth Circuit's ruling in CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. Werner Enterprises, Inc. 479 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2007);
2. The parties shall file their supplemental briefs on or before August 23, 2019. Upon filing, Defendant's motions will be taken under submission without oral argument pursuant to CivLR 7.1 (d.1).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion hearing date set for August 12, 2019 at 3:00 p.m. is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
