Filed: Mar. 31, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 31, 2014
Summary: ORDER ROBERT C. CHAMBERS, Chief District Judge. This case was consolidated with Belville v. Ford Motor Co., 3:13-6529, and Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 3:13-14207, for pretrial purposes, as the actions involve common questions of fact. The Court designated Belville v. Ford Motor Co., as the lead case. Ford filed substantially similar motions to dismiss in all three cases. On this day, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order in Belville, which granted, in part, and denied, in part,
Summary: ORDER ROBERT C. CHAMBERS, Chief District Judge. This case was consolidated with Belville v. Ford Motor Co., 3:13-6529, and Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 3:13-14207, for pretrial purposes, as the actions involve common questions of fact. The Court designated Belville v. Ford Motor Co., as the lead case. Ford filed substantially similar motions to dismiss in all three cases. On this day, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order in Belville, which granted, in part, and denied, in part, F..
More
ORDER
ROBERT C. CHAMBERS, Chief District Judge.
This case was consolidated with Belville v. Ford Motor Co., 3:13-6529, and Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 3:13-14207, for pretrial purposes, as the actions involve common questions of fact. The Court designated Belville v. Ford Motor Co., as the lead case. Ford filed substantially similar motions to dismiss in all three cases. On this day, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order in Belville, which granted, in part, and denied, in part, Ford's motion. For the reasons fully set forth in that Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court finds it applies with equal force in this matter.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in Belville, the Court DENIES Ford's motion to dismiss for failure to adequately allege a defect; GRANTS Ford's motion to dismiss the warranty claims of those Plaintiffs who have not experienced a sudden unintended acceleration; DENIES Ford's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim as to the warranty claims of those Plaintiffs who have experienced a sudden unintended acceleration;1 DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Ford's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief pursuant to the primary jurisdiction doctrine; and GRANTS Ford's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' fraud and fraudulent concealment claims under Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and declines to extend the statute of limitations on the basis of fraudulent concealment.2
Ford does raise an additional argument in this case that was raised in Smith, but not raised in Belville. Like Smith, Ford argues that some of Plaintiffs' claims must be dismissed because Plaintiffs failed to provide Ford pre-suit notice and an opportunity to correct the alleged problems without court intervention. In Smith, the Court denied the motion without prejudice because the issue was not adequately briefed. In this case, the parties have briefed the arguments more completely, but the Court finds it would be better to resolve the pre-suit issues in this case at the same time it resolves the pre-suit issues in Smith. Accordingly, as in Smith, the Court DENIES Ford's argument WITHOUT PREJUDICE.3
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS, in part, and DENIES, in part, Ford's Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 13. The Court will enter an Order with respect to further scheduling of the remaining matters in this case in the near future.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented parties.
