From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

TriState HVAC Equipment, LLP v. Big Belly Solar, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Oct 20, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-1054 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 2010)

Summary

stating that because a related state court case was dismissed before party was required to file a pleading, that party was not precluded from filing alleged compulsory counterclaims in federal court

Summary of this case from Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Dubois

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-1054.

October 20, 2010


ORDER


AND NOW, this 20th day of October, 2010, upon careful consideration of defendant Big Belly's motion to dismiss or alternatively to transfer venue (docket no. 6), plaintiff TriState's opposition thereto, and Big Belly's reply, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:

The motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) is DENIED.

The motion to dismiss Count IV, TriState's claim under the Lanham Act, is GRANTED.

The motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a compulsory counterclaim is DENIED.

The motion to dismiss the complaint for improper venue under Rule 12(b)(3) is DENIED.

The motion to transfer venue to the District of Massachusetts is GRANTED, and the Clerk shall transfer this action to the District of Massachusetts.

The discovery conference scheduled for November 3, 2010, is canceled.


Summaries of

TriState HVAC Equipment, LLP v. Big Belly Solar, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Oct 20, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-1054 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 2010)

stating that because a related state court case was dismissed before party was required to file a pleading, that party was not precluded from filing alleged compulsory counterclaims in federal court

Summary of this case from Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Dubois

dismissing Lanham Act claim where the plaintiff "ha[d] not alleged sufficient facts that would support a conclusion [that the defendant's] statements . . . were false or misleading."

Summary of this case from Checker Cab Phila., Inc. v. Uber Techs., Inc.
Case details for

TriState HVAC Equipment, LLP v. Big Belly Solar, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:TRISTATE HVAC EQUIPMENT, LLP, Plaintiff, v. BIG BELLY SOLAR, INC.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Oct 20, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-1054 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 2010)

Citing Cases

Zero Techs. v. The Clorox Co.

In this District, courts tend to evaluate where the anticompetitive conduct occurred as where the claim…

United States v. Mouzon

Arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief are generally waived because fairness requires that…