Summary
noting that "statements are promissory in nature, and . . . relate solely to future conduct and events [cannot] [a]s a matter of law, . . . form the basis of a negligent misrepresentation claim"
Summary of this case from Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp. v. Dealmaker Nissan, LLCOpinion
08 Civ. 9385 (SHS).
September 16, 2009
ORDER
On August 24, 2009, Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that defendants' motions to dismiss the corrected complaint be denied without prejudice. It is clear from the context that the Magistrate Judge determined that the complaint fails to state any claims for relief against the moving defendants but was recommending that this Court give plaintiff another opportunity to amend his corrected complaint. The Court's records indicate that as of today, no objections have been filed by any party.
After a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that (1) the motions to dismiss filed by defendants Bazsuly [3], Kern [4] and Lawand [5] are granted but without prejudice to plaintiff amending the corrected complaint in order to attempt to plead facts sufficient to state viable claims against these defendants on or before October 12, 2009; and (2) defendant Bazsuly's motion for Rule 11 sanctions is denied.
SO ORDERED: